May, 20 2010, 10:55am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Rachel Myers, ACLU national, (212) 549-2689 or 2666; media@aclu.org
Jennifer Rudinger, ACLU of North Carolina, (919) 834-3466
Request for Amazon User Records Unconstitutional, Says ACLU
Group Will Join Lawsuit If North Carolina Department of Revenue Keeps Up Demand for Private Information
RALEIGH, NC
The American Civil Liberties Union and the
ACLU of North Carolina today sent a letter to North Carolina Secretary
of Revenue Kenneth Lay reiterating concern over a recent request by the
state Department of Revenue (NCDOR) for the private records of
Amazon.com customers. The letter informs Lay that the ACLU will take
legal action on behalf of North Carolina residents who are Amazon.com
customers if NCDOR persists in its demand for their constitutionally
protected private information. Specifically, the letter says the ACLU
and its clients will intervene in an existing lawsuit brought by
Amazon.com to stop NCDOR from collecting individually identifiable
information that could be linked to specific purchases made on
Amazon.com.
According to the lawsuit filed by
Amazon in the Western District of Washington in April, NCDOR issued a
request to Amazon for the purchase records since August 2003 of
customers with a North Carolina shipping address in order to impose
taxes on the purchases. Amazon has apparently already provided the NCDOR
with product codes that reveal the exact items purchased - including
books on the subjects of mental health, alcoholism and LGBT issues.
Amazon has withheld individually identifiable user information,
including names and addresses that could be linked back to the
individual purchases, but asserts that the NCDOR continues to insist
that such information be disclosed. In its letter today, the ACLU
asserted that such disclosure would violate the constitutional rights of
thousands of North Carolina consumers to read and purchase the lawful
materials of their choice, free from government intrusion.
The following can
be attributed to Aden Fine, staff attorney with the ACLU's Speech,
Privacy and Technology Project:
"The Constitution guarantees
Americans the right to read and buy the lawful materials of their choice
without the government keeping tabs on the details of their purchases.
Amazon was right to stand up for the rights of its customers and to
refuse to turn over their personal information to the North Carolina
Department of Revenue."
The following can
be attributed to Jennifer Rudinger, Executive Director of the ACLU of
North Carolina:
"The ACLU is not taking issue with
the Department's authority to collect taxes on the value of these
purchases, but there is no legitimate reason why government officials
need to know which North Carolina residents are reading what books or
purchasing which specific brands of products. We hope to be able to work
out a satisfactory resolution to this matter so that consumers in North
Carolina can rest assured that their privacy is protected."
The full text of the letter is below
and online at: www.aclu.org/free-speech-technology-and-liberty/aclu-letter-north-carolina-department-revenue-secretary-kenneth-l
May 20, 2010
Via Facsimile
Secretary Kenneth Lay
North Carolina Department of Revenue
501 N. Wilmington St.
Raleigh, NC 27604
re: Amazon.com LLC v. Lay,
2:10-cv-00664 (W.D. Wash.)
Dear Secretary Lay:
We are writing to follow up on our
fax dated April 21, 2010, regarding the Department of Revenue's request
for private customer records concerning the items that North Carolina
residents have received through Amazon.com. We write to inform you that
we have clients - North Carolina residents who are Amazon customers and
whose private records are at stake - who are gravely concerned about
government access to their purchasing records. The information
requested will reveal which North Carolina residents, including our
clients, have received which specific books, movies, and other
expressive and private items from Amazon. Our clients are prepared to
intervene in the lawsuit in the Western District of Washington to
protect their constitutional rights if necessary, but we write this
letter in the hope that the Department might agree to a solution that
would protect our clients' fundamental rights and avoid unnecessary
litigation.
According to Amazon's lawsuit, the
Department has issued information requests to Amazon that seek a broad
set of information regarding all sales to customers with a North
Carolina shipping address since August 2003. The Department has already
received detailed data from Amazon about these purchases, including the
specific product code for each purchase, which reveals the full
description of each purchased item. These product descriptions reveal
highly expressive and private information about consumer choices: for
example, whether a person has received a book on alcoholism or home
workshop weaponry, a movie like "Brokeback Mountain," or "sexual
wellness" items such as sex toys.
Amazon appears to have turned over
this detailed information already. We understand, based on press
reports, that the Department is now taking the position that it does not
want some of this information, such as the titles of books purchased,
and that its information request did not seek to obtain such
information. Amazon appears to dispute this account. We would
appreciate receiving a copy of the information requests, redacted if
necessary to protect taxpayer information, so that we could make an
independent determination.
In any event, the fact remains that
whatever the requests called for, the Department is now in possession of
this highly sensitive and personal information, and if the Department
persists in its demand that Amazon now additionally provide detailed
user information, including names and addresses, the constitutional
rights of our clients and tens of thousands of North Carolina consumers
will be violated.
Moreover, merely limiting the request
to the type of product purchased and not including the specific brand
or title of the product would still reveal information about North
Carolina residents -e.g., that they have purchased "condoms" or "yeast
infection kits" - that the State is not permitted to collect. To the
extent the Department believes it needs to learn what type of products
were purchased, please explain why that specific information is
necessary so that we can better understand the Department's position.
We want to reiterate that we are not
challenging the Department's authority to impose a tax for these
purchases or to conduct an audit. We are concerned, however, about the
apparent breadth of the information requests, which sweep up
constitutionally protected information that the Department does not need
to determine tax liability. It is clearly established law that the
Constitution forbids the government from collecting such information.
See, e.g., In re Grand Jury Subpoena to Amazon.com, 246 F.R.D. 570,
572-73 (W.D. Wis. 2007); In re Grand Jury Subpoena to Kramerbooks &
Afterwords, Inc., Nos. 98-MC-135-NHJ, 98-MC-138-NHJ, 26 Med. L. Rptr.
1599, 1600 (D.D.C. Apr. 6, 1998); Tattered Cover, Inc. v. City of
Thornton, 44 P.3d 1044, 1052 (Colo. 2002).
As one court has already ruled in
upholding the constitutional rights of Amazon customers against
government intrusion into their expressive choices: "[I]f word were to
spread over the Net-and it would-that the [government] had demanded and
received Amazon's list of customers and their personal purchases, the
chilling effect on expressive e-commerce would frost keyboards across
America." In re Grand Jury Subpoena to Amazon.com, 246 F.R.D. at 573.
To ensure that our clients' and North
Carolina consumers' constitutional rights are not violated, and to
minimize the clear chilling effect from the Department's information
requests, we respectfully ask that the Department:
- Destroy the records that it
has already received from Amazon that reveal what products were
purchased by North Carolina customers; - Make a public statement
acknowledging that it does not need records from Amazon or any other
entity that reveal the specific products or the type of products that
were purchased by each customer; - Agree to take all necessary
steps to change its existing policy and practice and to institute a new
policy and practice to ensure that the Department does not issue
overbroad information requests in the future to entities such as Amazon
that call for the disclosure of constitutionally protected customer
information, such as what products were purchased by each customer.
We have reason to believe that the
Department has issued similar information requests to entities other
than Amazon and that the Department has received similar customer
information which is constitutionally protected in response. Please
confirm whether that is correct. That the requests to Amazon are not
the only such requests that have been made makes it all the more
imperative that the Department cease issuing such overbroad requests
that are sweeping in constitutionally protected information.
Please let us know how the Department
wishes to proceed. If we do not hear back from you by May 28, 2010,
our clients will be forced to intervene in this lawsuit to protect their
rights. I will be out of the office for much of this week and all of
the week of May 24, 2010, so please contact Aden Fine at (212) 549-2693
to discuss this matter further. We look forward to hearing from you
shortly.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Rudinger
Executive Director
American Civil Liberties Union of
North Carolina
P.O. Box 28004
Raleigh, NC 27611
Aden Fine
Mariko Hirose
American Civil Liberties Union
Foundation
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
'We Cannot Be Silent': Tlaib Leads 19 US Lawmakers Demanding Israel Stop Starving Gaza
"This current blockade is starving Palestinian civilians in violation of international law, and the militarization of food will not help."
Jun 30, 2025
As the death toll from Israel's forced starvation of Palestinians continues to rise amid the ongoing U.S.-backed genocidal assault and siege of the Gaza Strip, Rep. Rashida Tlaib on Monday led 18 congressional colleagues in a letter demanding that the Trump administration push for an immediate cease-fire, an end to the Israeli blockade, and a resumption of humanitarian aid into the embattled coastal enclave.
"We are outraged at the weaponization of humanitarian aid and escalating use of starvation as a weapon of war by the Israeli government against the Palestinian people in Gaza," Tlaib (D-Mich.)—the only Palestinian American member of Congress—and the other lawmakers wrote in their letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. "For over three months, Israeli authorities have blocked nearly all humanitarian aid from entering Gaza, fueling mass starvation and suffering among over 2 million people. This follows over 600 days of bombardment, destruction, and forced displacement, and nearly two decades of siege."
"According to experts, 100% of the population is now at risk of famine, and nearly half a million civilians, most of them children, are facing 'catastrophic' conditions of 'starvation, death, destitution, and extremely critical acute malnutrition levels,'" the legislators noted. "These actions are a direct violation of both U.S. and international humanitarian law, with devastating human consequences."
Gaza officials have reported that hundreds of Palestinians—including at least 66 children—have died in Gaza from malnutrition and lack of medicine since Israel ratcheted up its siege in early March. Earlier this month, the United Nations Children's Fund warned that childhood malnutrition was "rising at an alarming rate," with 5,119 children under the age of 5 treated for the life-threatening condition in May alone. Of those treated children, 636 were diagnosed with severe acute malnutrition, the most lethal form of the condition.
Meanwhile, nearly 600 Palestinians have been killed and more than 4,000 others have been injured as Israeli occupation forces carry out near-daily massacres of desperate people seeking food and other humanitarian aid at or near distribution sites run by the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). Israel Defense Forces officers and troops have said that they were ordered to shoot and shell aid-seeking Gazans, even when they posed no threat.
"This is not aid," the lawmakers' letter argues. "UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini has warned that, under the GHF, 'aid distribution has become a death trap.' We cannot allow this to continue."
"We strongly oppose any efforts to dismantle the existing U.N.-led humanitarian coordination system in Gaza, which is ready to resume operations immediately once the blockade is lifted," the legislators wrote. "Replacing this system with the GHF further restricts lifesaving aid and undermines the work of long-standing, trusted humanitarian organizations. The result of this policy will be continued starvation and famine."
"We cannot be silent. This current blockade is starving Palestinian civilians in violation of international law, and the militarization of food will not help," the lawmakers added. "We demand an immediate end to the blockade, an immediate resumption of unfettered humanitarian aid entry into Gaza, the restoration of U.S. funding to UNRWA, and an immediate and lasting cease-fire. Any other path forward is a path toward greater hunger, famine, and death."
Since launching the retaliatory annihilation of Gaza in response to the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, Israeli forces have killed at least 56,531 Palestinians and wounded more than 133,600 others, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which also says over 14,000 people are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath rubble. Upward of 2 million Gazans have been forcibly displaced, often more than once.
On Sunday, U.S. President Donald Trump reiterated a call for a cease-fire deal that would secure the release of the remaining 22 living Israeli and other hostages held by Hamas.
In addition to Tlaib, the letter to Rubio was signed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Democratic Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Al Green (Texas), Jonathan Jackson (Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Henry "Hank"Johnson (Ga.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Jim McGovern (Mass.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Chellie Pingree (Maine), Mark Pocan (Wisc.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Delia Ramirez (Ill.), Paul Tonko (N.Y.), Nydia Velázquez (N.Y.), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (N.J.).
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden National Security Adviser Among Those Crafting 'Project 2029' Policy Agenda for Democrats
"Jake Sullivan's been a critical decision-maker in every Democratic catastrophe of the last decade," said one observer. "Why is he still in the inner circle?"
Jun 30, 2025
Amid the latest battle over the direction the Democratic Party should move in, a number of strategists and political advisers from across the center-left's ideological spectrum are assembling a committee to determine the policy agenda they hope will be taken up by a Democratic successor to President Donald Trump.
Some of the names on the list of people crafting the agenda—named Project 2029, an echo of the far-right Project 2025 blueprint Trump is currently enacting—left progressives with deepened concerns that party insiders have "learnt nothing" and "forgotten nothing" from the president's electoral victories against centrist Democratic candidates over the past decade, as one economist said.
The project is being assembled by former Democratic speechwriter Andrei Cherny, now co-founder of the policy journal Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, and includes Jake Sullivan, a former national security adviser under the Biden administration; Jim Kessler, founder of the centrist think tank Third Way; and Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress and longtime adviser to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Progressives on the advisory board for the project include economist Justin Wolfers and former Roosevelt Institute president Felicia Wong, but antitrust expert Hal Singer said any policy agenda aimed at securing a Democratic victory in the 2028 election "needs way more progressives."
As The New York Times noted in its reporting on Project 2029, the panel is being convened amid extensive infighting regarding how the Democratic Party can win back control of the White House and Congress.
After democratic socialist and state Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani's (D-36) surprise win against former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo last week in New York City's mayoral primary election—following a campaign with a clear-eyed focus on making childcare, rent, public transit, and groceries more affordable—New York City has emerged as a battleground in the fight. Influential Democrats including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) have so far refused to endorse him and attacked him for his unequivocal support for Palestinian rights.
Progressives have called on party leaders to back Mamdani, pointing to his popularity with young voters, and accept that his clear message about making life more affordable for working families resonated with Democratic constituents.
But speaking to the Times, Democratic pollster Celinda Lake exemplified how many of the party's strategists have insisted that candidates only need to package their messages to voters differently—not change the messages to match the political priorities of Mamdani and other popular progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
"We didn't lack policies," Lake told the Times of recent national elections. "But we lacked a functioning narrative to communicate those policies."
Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have drawn crowds of thousands in red districts this year at Sanders' Fighting Oligarchy rallies—another sign, progressives say, that voters are responding to politicians who focus on billionaires' outsized control over the U.S. political system and on economic justice.
Project 2029's inclusion of strategists like Kessler, who declared economic populism "a dead end for Democrats" in 2013, demonstrates "the whole problem [with Democratic leadership] in a nutshell," said Jonathan Cohn of Progressive Mass—as does Sullivan's seat on the advisory board.
As national security adviser to President Joe Biden, Sullivan played a key role in the administration's defense and funding of Israel's assault on Gaza, which international experts and human rights groups have said is a genocide.
"Jake Sullivan's been a critical decision-maker in every Democratic catastrophe of the last decade: Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Israel/Gaza War, and the 2024 Joe Biden campaign," said Nick Field of the Pennsylvania Capital-Star. "Why is he still in the inner circle?"
"Jake Sullivan is shaping domestic policy for the next Democratic administration," he added. "Who is happy with the Biden foreign policy legacy?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rick Scott Pushes Amendment to GOP Budget Bill That Could Kick Millions More Off Medicaid
Scott's proposal for more draconian cuts has renewed scrutiny regarding his past as a hospital executive, where he oversaw the "largest government fraud settlement ever," which included stealing from Medicaid.
Jun 30, 2025
Sen. Rick Scott has introduced an amendment to the Republican budget bill that would slash another $313 million from Medicaid and kick off millions more recipients.
The latest analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that 17 million people could lose their health insurance by 2034 as the result of the bill as it already exists.
According to a preliminary estimate by the Democrats on the Joint Congressional Economic Committee, that number could balloon up to anywhere from 20 to 29 million if Scott's (R-Fla.) amendment passes.
The amendment will be voted on as part of the Senate's vote-a-rama, which is expected to run deep into Monday night and possibly into Tuesday morning.
"If Sen. Rick Scott's amendment gets put forward, this would be a self-inflicted healthcare crisis," said Tahra Hoops, director of economic analysis at Chamber of Progress.
The existing GOP reconciliation package contains onerous new restrictions, including new work requirements and administrative hurdles, that will make it harder for poor recipients to claim Medicaid benefits.
Scott's amendment targets funding for the program by ending the federal government's 90% cost sharing for recipients who join Medicaid after 2030. Those who enroll after that date would have their medical care reimbursed by the federal government at a lower rate of 50%.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) introduced the increased rate in 2010 to incentivize states to expand Medicaid, allowing more people to be covered.
Scott has said his program would "grandfather" in those who had already been receiving the 90% reimbursement rate.
However, Medicaid is run through the states, which will have to spend more money to keep covering those who need the program after 2030.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that this provision "would shift an additional $93 billion in federal Medicaid funding to states from 2031 through 2034 on top of the cuts already in the Senate bill."
This will almost certainly result in states having to cut back, by introducing their stricter requirements or paperwork hurdles.
Additionally, nine states have "trigger laws" that are set to end the program immediately if the federal matching rate is reduced: Arizona, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Utah, and Virginia.
The Joint Congressional Economic Committee estimated Tuesday that around 2.5 million more people will lose their insurance as a result of those cuts.
If all the states with statutory Medicaid expansion ended it as a result of Scott's cuts, as many as 12.5 million could lose their insurance. Combined with the rest of the bill, that's potentially 29 million people losing health insurance coverage, the committee said.
A chart shows how many people are estimated to lose healthcare coverage with each possible version of the GOP bill.(Chart: Congressional Joint Economic Committee Democrats)
There are enough Republicans in the Senate to pass the bill with Scott's amendment. However, they can afford no more than three defections. According to Politico, Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) have signaled they will vote against the amendment.
Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.V.) also said he'd "have a hard time" voting yes on the bill if Scott's amendment passed. His state of West Virginia has the second-highest rate of people using federal medical assistance of any state in the country, behind only Mississippi.
Critics have called out Scott for lying to justify this line of cuts. In a recent Fox News appearance, Scott claimed that his new restrictions were necessary to stop Democrats who want to "give illegal aliens Medicaid benefits," even though they are not eligible for the program.
Scott's proposal has also brought renewed scrutiny to his past as a healthcare executive.
"Ironically enough, some of the claims against Scott's old hospital company revolved around exploiting Medicaid, and billing for services that patients didn't need," wrote Andrew Perez in Rolling Stone Monday.
In 2000, Scott's hospital company, HCA, was forced to pay $840 million in fines, penalties, and damages to resolve claims of unlawful billing practices in what was called the "largest government fraud settlement ever." Among the charges were that during Scott's tenure, the company overbilled Medicare and Medicaid by pretending patients were sicker than they actually were.
The company entered an additional settlement in 2003, paying out another $631 million to compensate for the money stolen from these and other government programs.
Scott himself was never criminally charged, but resigned in 1997 as the Department of Justice began to probe his company's activities. Despite the scandal, Scott not only became a U.S. senator, but is the wealthiest man in Congress, with a net worth of more than half a billion dollars.
The irony of this was not lost on Perez, who wrote: "A few decades later, Scott is now trying to extract a huge amount of money from state Medicaid funds to help finance Trump's latest round of tax cuts for the rich."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular