Court Overturns Bookstore Ruling

http://www.abcnews.go.com/ ^ | April 8 2002 | AP

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Court Overturns Bookstore Ruling

Colorado Supreme Court Refuses to Order Bookstore to Turn Over Sales Records on How-To Drug Books

D E N V E R, April 8 — The Colorado Supreme Court refused to order a bookstore Monday to tell police who bought two how-to books on making illegal drugs, saying the First Amendment and state Constitution protect the right to purchase books anonymously.

The unanimous 6-0 decision overturns a ruling by a Denver judge who said Tattered Cover Book Store owner Joyce Meskis must give records of the sale to a Denver-area drug task force.

Police and prosecutors in the closely watched case had argued that the buyer's identity was critical to their investigation of a methamphetamine lab and that they had no other way to prove who owned the books.

But the high court declared that the First Amendment and the Colorado Constitution "protect an individual's fundamental right to purchase books anonymously, free from governmental interference."

Chris Finan, president of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, said the ruling makes Colorado law the most protective in the nation of a bookseller's right to protect the identity of its customers. Colorado's Supreme Court is the only one to rule on the issue, Finan said.

"It is a huge relief and just a thoughtful and well-reasoned decision by the court for which we are very grateful," Meskis said.

Police sought the records after finding a mailer envelope from the bookstore outside a mobile home they had raided. Inside the home were a methamphetamine lab and the how-to books "Advanced Techniques of Clandestine Psychedelic and Amphetamine Manufacture" by Uncle Fester and "The Construction and Operation of Clandestine Drug Laboratories" by Jack B. Nimble.

The envelope was printed with an invoice number and the trailer's address, but no name. Police found no fingerprints on the books and obtained a search warrant to find out who ordered them. Police suspected the man who lived in the master bedroom where the lab was found, but needed proof.

The court said Monday that the search warrant should never have been issued.

Tattered Cover, one of the country's largest independent bookstores, had argued that the order violated its customers' First Amendment rights. It was assisted in the case by the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression.

So far, no arrests have been made in the drug case pending the outcome of the court challenge.

Bob Grant, who as the district attorney in adjacent Adams District refused to go after a search warrant, forcing police to go to the Denver district attorney, said the ruling sets a higher standard than the one established by the U.S. Supreme Court.

He said the ruling will force prosecutors to show a compelling need, as opposed to just the "substantial and legitimate interest" required in most states.

Prosecutors could still go back to court with more evidence to meet the higher standard.

Sue Armstrong, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said the ruling does not prohibit police from getting records but sets the bar higher for obtaining a search warrant.

"The court has showed its best face in protecting the rights of privacy for those of us who visit bookstores," Armstrong said.

Bookstore records became an issue in 1998 during the investigation of President Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Independent counsel Ken Starr subpoenaed Lewinsky's purchase records from the Washington bookstore Kramerbooks. After Kramerbooks challenged the subpoena, Lewinsky's defense team voluntarily turned over the records.

In another case, a Borders bookstore in Overland Park, Kan., successfully fought a subpoena issued in a drug investigation for records of how a customer paid for merchandise. Investigators were not trying to find out what books the customer bought.

[spqrzilla9]

There certainly is. You have a right to purchase any legal item anonymously. What business is it of the government? What federal/state law says the government has a right to a record of any or all of your purchases?

You don't seem to understand this issue at all. Of course the government has no right to make inquiries of such information at a whim. And no one is claiming so.

The issue is whether or not there is some special right to conceal book purchases above all other information once the requirements of the Fourth Amendment is met for a search for a criminal investigation.

The police have the right, with a properly issued warrant on probable cause to search my home, the book shelves in my home, my possessions, my bank records, and even to obtain blood samples. But somehow you seem to think that the records of a book purchase is protected by some imaginary right to a greater extent. Quite silly.