EFF has filed suit on behalf of a member of the European Parliament, demanding that the U.S. government release records about her "risk assessment" score and other information gathered about her during her international travels. The lawsuit came just days after the disclosure that the U.S. and the European Union may soon finalize an agreement authorizing the transatlantic exchange of large amounts of personal data.

During the ongoing and contentious debates between the U.S. and the EU over travelers' records and the privacy rights of EU citizens, the U.S. government has repeatedly claimed that any person can obtain her records through a FOIA request. To test those assurances, Sophia In 't Veld -- who represents the Netherlands in the European Parliament and serves on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs -- filed FOIA requests with the Homeland Security, Justice, and State Departments, asking for any information about her that is included in the various U.S. programs and systems used to track international travelers. However, the agencies have failed to comply with the requests as required by federal law.

EFF has filed suit against the Department of Justice, demanding information about communications between the agency's former top privacy official and Google, the official's current employer.

The Asian Law Caucus (ALC) and EFF have filed suit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for denying access to public records on the questioning and searches of travelers at U.S. borders.

The suit responds to growing complaints by U.S. citizens and immigrants of excessive or repeated screenings by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents. ALC, a San Francisco-based civil rights organization, received more than 20 complaints from Northern California residents last year who said they were grilled about their families, religious practices, volunteer activities, political beliefs, or associations when returning to the United States from travels abroad. In addition, customs agents examined travelers' books, business cards collected from friends and colleagues, handwritten notes, personal photos, laptop computer files, and cell phone directories, and sometimes made copies of this information.

EFF has filed suits against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice demanding any information about telecommunications companies' efforts to get off the hook for their role in the government's illegal electronic surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. EFF's suits ask for the immediate disclosure of the agencies' telecom lobbying records, including any documents concerning briefings, discussions, or other contacts officials have had with representatives of telecommunications companies or members of Congress.

In January 2007, the New York Times reported that the Defense Department had been issuing National Security Letters domestically to obtain financial and credit records about hundreds of people, including Americans. EFF submitted FOIA requests to several agencies seeking records about the military's use of this controversial investigative tool within the United States. The records will be posted here as EFF receives them.

EFF v. Department of Justice, Civil Action No. 06-1708-CKK (D.D.C.) (filed October 3, 2006)

In this Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) seeks information about two electronic surveillance systems developed by the FBI: DCS-3000 and Red Hook.

Little is publicly known about these spying tools. DCS-3000 was developed in the wake of "Carnivore" or DCS-1000, a controversial surveillance system the FBI used several years ago to monitor online traffic through Internet service providers. One Department of Justice report said DCS-3000 was created to "to intercept personal communications services delivered via emerging digital technologies used by wireless carriers." According to the same report, Red Hook is a system developed to "collect voice and data calls and then process and display the intercepted information."

On May 7, 2007, a federal judge ordered the FBI to process and release documents responsive to EFF's request on a rolling basis. Those records will be posted here as EFF receives them.

EFF v. Department of Justice, Civil Action No. 06-1773-RBW (D.D.C.) (filed October 17, 2006)

This Freedom of Information Act case seeks disclosure of FBI records concerning the scope and privacy impact of the Bureau’s Investigative Data Warehouse (“IDW”), a huge database that contains hundreds of millions of records containing personal information. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the FBI began development of the IDW “to provide counterterrorism investigators and analysts with quick, easy access to the full breadth of information relating to terrorism.” As of March 2005, the database contained more than 100 million pages of terrorism-related documents. The amount of information contained in the IDW appears to be growing at a tremendous rate. In May 2006, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III testified to Congress that the “IDW now contains over 560 million FBI and other agency documents.” Despite the vast amount of personal information contained in the IDW, the FBI has never published a Privacy Act notice describing the system or explaining the ways in which the records might be used.

Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Department of Defense, Civil Action No. 07-0216 EGS (D.D.C. filed January 31, 2007). In this case, EFF sought information concerning the Pentagon's monitoring of military websites, including soldiers' blogs. According to news reports, an Army unit called the Army Web Risk Assessment Cell ("AWRAC") reviews hundreds of thousands of websites every month, notifying webmasters and bloggers when it sees information it finds inappropriate. Some soliders have told reporters that they have cut back on their posts or shut down their sites altogether because of the military's policies on blogging. EFF filed its suit after the Department of Defense and Army failed to respond to FOIA requests about the blog monitoring program. The documents ultimately released by the agencies are below.

EFF v. Department of Justice, 07-656-JDB D.D.C. filed April 10, 2007

Before the USA PATRIOT Act, the FBI could only use so-called National Security Letters for securing the records of suspected terrorists or spies. But under PATRIOT the FBI can use them to get telephone, Internet, financial, credit, and other personal records about anybody without any court approval as long as it believes the information could be relevant to an authorized terrorism or espionage investigation.

From the moment PATRIOT was passed, we said the NSL power was ripe for abuse and unconstitutional, and, in March 2007, the Department of Justice's inspector general released a report confirming extensive misuse of NSLs in a sample of four FBI field offices. An internal audit by the FBI confirmed that the problem was far more extensive than first thought.

In the wake of the inspector general's report, EFF filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking fundamental information about the FBI's abuse of power. On June 16, 2007, a federal judge ordered the FBI to process 2,500 pages a month responsive to EFF's request. We'll be highlighting key excerpts of the materials here as well as posting the entire documents.

EFF v. Department of Justice, 07-403-TFH (D.D.C.) filed Feb. 27, 2007

On January 17, 2007, the Bush Administration announced that it had let the shadowy Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) review the NSA's domestic spying program, which was previously operated without any judicial authorization whatsoever. This Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case seeks disclosure of the FISC's secret orders.

While claiming that the FISC has now legalized the program, the Administration has refused to let anyone else see the court orders and confirm key details about what they permit. In addition to its refusal to disclose copies of the FISC orders in response to EFF's FOIA request, the Department of Justice has similarly refused to make the orders available to the Senate Judiciary Committee in response to a subpoena.

Oral argument in the case is scheduled for July 26, 2007, before Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.