Comments of the American Civil Liberties Union to the Department of Homeland Security Regarding the Proposed Automated Targeting System (12/1/2006)
Privacy Office U.S. Department of Homeland
Security Washington, DC 20528
Re: Comments of the American
Civil Liberties Union to the Department of Homeland Security Regarding the
Proposed Automated Targeting System [Privacy Act of 1974: System of Records;
Automated Targeting System, DHS6-2006-0060, 71 Fed. Reg.
64,543]
The ACLU is a nationwide, non-partisan organization of more
than 500,000 members dedicated to protecting the principles of liberty, freedom,
and equality set forth in the Bill of Rights in the United States
Constitution. For almost 80 years, the ACLU has sought to preserve
and strengthen privacy and equality in American life.
The Department of Homeland Security announced in a November
2, 2006 notice in the Federal Register its intention to institute a
program that involves the creation of security ratings of American
citizenstens of
millions of travelers. It
announced that the program would go into effect on December 4, 2006.
This program represents a
monumental change that will have profound effects on Americans’ privacy. In brief, it:
- Will put
the government into the business of creating “security ratings” for millions of
its own citizens, an unprecedented step with the potential to alter the
relationship between the state and the individual.
-
Illegitimately claims sweeping exemptions from the
Privacy Act, a law that was passed specifically to prevent law enforcement from
keeping files or databases on innocent people not suspected of a crime.
- Will likely make judgments based
on government databases that we know are already riddled with errors.
- Will leave individuals without
vital rights to review, correct or challenge security ratings or the information
on which they are based.
For
further details on these problems, we commend for your consideration the
incisive comments on this program that have been filed by the Electronic
Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
group.
Instead, we will confine ourselves here to urging in the
strongest possible terms that the Department, if it will not withdraw this
proposal altogether, at a minimum extend the public comment period to a
reasonable period that will allow for interested parties to provide proper
analysis and for the Department to adequately consider those comments.
As the EFF and EPIC group’s comments make clear, this
program represents a monumental change that will have profound effects on
Americans’ privacy, and is in questionable conformance with the Privacy
Act. The creation of
security ratings of innocent
people in the United StatesAmerican citizens is something that has
proven highly controversial in the past, and which the American Civil Liberties
Union and many other groups and individuals have previously objected to with the
greatest vehemence.
And yet the program’s Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) was not
made available to the public until November 27 – only one week before the
program is slated to go into effect.
Given that the PIA represents the most comprehensive explanation of the
system provided to the public, that is simply not a reasonable amount of
time. It does not allow respondents
to adequately analyze the privacy impact statement and its implications,
formulate comments articulating that analysis clearly, and submit them with time
for DHS to properly consider them before the program becomes effective.
To make matters worse, even the original, incomplete
publication in the Federal Register notifying the public of the
Department’s plans was filed barely 4 weeks before the plan is slated to go into
effect. The notice states that the
program will go into effect “unless comments are received that result in a
contrary determination,” and as practical matter there is no time between when
many comments will be received and the program will go into effect. There is
essentially no time for comments to be distributed, considered and discussed
within the Department. Thus, the Department’s commitment to meeting its stated
schedule for instituting this substantial change clearly suggests that the
Department has little intention of giving the comments that are received a
proper review.
This cursory treatment, which borders on a sham, is far less
than is warranted by the historic, unprecedented step of putting the government
into the business of creating mass security ratings of American
citizensindividuals which are then retained in
government databases for 40 years.
We urge the Department to withdraw this proposal, for the
reasons articulated by EFF and EPIC.
But at the very least, it must extend the public comment period to a
reasonable period that will allow for interested parties to provide extended
analysis based on both the Privacy Act notice and the PIA.
Sincerely,
Caroline Fredrickson Director, Washington Legislative Office
Barry Steinhardt Director, Technology and Liberty Project
Timothy Sparapani Legislative
Counsel for Privacy Rights
|