Source: https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/436-f-3d-712-596980658
Timestamp: 2020-08-08 12:56:46
Document Index: 712996570

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 201']

436 F.3d 712 (7th Cir. 2006), 04-3888, Bassiouni v. F.B.I. - Federal Cases - Case Law - VLEX 596980658
436 F.3d 712 (7th Cir. 2006), 04-3888, Bassiouni v. F.B.I.
Docket Nº: 04-3888.
Citation: 436 F.3d 712
Party Name: Mahmoud C. BASSIOUNI, also known as Cherif Bassiouni, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendant-Appellee.
436 F.3d 712 (7th Cir. 2006)
Mahmoud C. BASSIOUNI, also known as Cherif Bassiouni, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 02 C 8918  Joan Humphrey Lefkow, Judge.
A. The Privacy Act  An Overview
In some cases, agencies may exempt certain record systems from Privacy Act requirements and, specifically for our purposes, the § 552a(d) amendment process.
Section 552a(j), entitled "General exemptions," allows the head of an agency "to exempt any system of records within the agency from any part of" the Act if the system is maintained by a law enforcement agency and if the information concerns certain criminal investigation functions. Id. § 552a(j)(2). Under this section, however, an agency may not exempt a system of records from § 552a(e)(7), which prohibits an agency from maintaining records describing an individual's exercise of his First Amendment rights. See id. § 552a(j).
In addition to the general exemption provision, agencies may exempt record systems from specific sections of the Act if the records are maintained "for law enforcement purposes. " Id. § 552a(k)(2). The amendment process of § 552a(d) is among those that may be exempted. Id. § 552a(k).3 Yet, although an agency may exempt its record system from the amendment process, the agency still may not keep records of activity that is protected by the First Amendment.
Passage of the . . . Act was both aided and hindered by the Congress' focus on Watergate and the impeachment hearings involving former President Nixon: aided, because the Watergate scandals had involved allegations of illegal wiretapping and surveillance of private citizens by federal agencies; and hindered, because the impeachment process left
little time for other legislation until the closing months of the session.
However, despite the limited legislative history, it is evident that Congress expressed particular concern with the Government's action in collecting information about citizens' exercise of their First Amendment rights. Both the Senate and the House versions of the bill contained protections to address these concerns. In the Senate bill, section 201 (b)(7) provided that an agency shall "establish no program for the purpose of collecting or maintaining information describing how individuals exercise rights guaranteed by the first amendment unless the head of the agency specifically determines that such program is required ...." S. 3418 § 201(b)(7), reprinted in Source Book 130. The Senate committee report explained that section 201 (b)(7)
reflect[ed] the preferred status . . . accord[ed] to information touching areas protected by the First Amendment .... It [wa]s aimed at protecting Americans in the enjoyment of the privacy of their thoughts, habits, attitudes and beliefs in matters having nothing to do with the requirements of their dealings with an agency seeking information.
S. Rep. No. 93-1183, at 56 (1974), reprinted in Source Book 209. Moreover, the committee noted, section...