Tech firms Google, Facebook, Yahoo and Microsoft cite rights in resisting feds' gag orders
Court documents unsealed Friday show Google, Yahoo, Facebook and Microsoft are arguing that government gag orders that stop them from disclosing the number of national security requests they receive violate the companies' First Amendment right to free speech.
The pushback against the government orders occurs as leaks by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the government uses tech firms in its surveillance efforts. Those revelations are damaging the bottom lines of the companies and their reputations, particularly overseas.
The gag orders, called “national security letters,” compel web and telecommunication companies to share information with the government while simultaneously prohibiting them from speaking about the request publicly. Since the Snowden leaks, Google, Yahoo, Facebook and Microsoft have fought to include more information about national security requests in regular reports that they release on how much data the government requests from their servers.
In the court documents, filed in April with the 9th Circuit Court in California, the tech giants argue that the government is infringing on their First Amendment rights. The government has argued that companies have no First Amendment right to share information gained from participation in a secret government investigation, according to the filing.
The case is on appeal.
The companies do not want to disclose any information that would place specific investigations in jeopardy, the filings note. But they do “wish to publish more detailed aggregate statistics about the volume, scope and type of (national security letters) that the government uses to demand information about their users,” and reject the arguments the government has made to justify the gag orders.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Supremacist to go on trial for capital murder in slayings of 3 at Jewish sites in Kan.
- Mother of 12-year-old shot dead by police criticizes Cleveland for faulting son, failing to apologize
- Oil spill in Washington river endangers wildlife
- Feds raid ‘maternity hotels’ in Ca.
- Expanded background checks pushed again on gun show, Internet purchases
- FDA orders warning on testosterone pills
- Feds find sweeping racial bias in Ferguson
- Idaho lawmakers object to Hindu prayer
- Petraeus, Justice Department reach plea deal on secret info given to mistress
- Case on Obamacare tax subsidies heads to Supreme Court
- Obama promises to veto Republican vote to reverse NLRB rule on unions