OK to Check on Mail

The article is submitted in its' entirety, my piece about this is below the article. 

Law Enforcement Requests for Postal Info Granted
By Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY WASHINGTON (March 6)

 U.S. postal authorities have approved more than 10,000 law enforcement requests to record names, addresses and other information from the outside of letters and packages of suspected criminals every year since 1998, according to U.S. Postal Inspection Service data. In each of those years, officials approved more than 97% of requests to record the information during criminal inquiries. In 2004, 2005 and 2006, the most recent year provided, officials granted at least 99.5% of requests, according to partial responses to inquiries filed by USA TODAY under the Freedom of Information Act. Postal officials have closely guarded the warrantless surveillance mail program, used for decades to track fugitives and to interrupt the delivery of illegal drugs or other controlled substances such as explosives. In other government surveillance, such as most wiretap programs, a judge approves requests. In this one, the USPIS’ chief inspector has authority to grant or deny a request. The Postal Service handles 214 billion pieces of mail each year. Correspondence and packages transported by private carriers, such as FedEx and UPS, are not subject to the surveillance. When the government’s warrantless surveillance of electronic communication has come under fire, civil liberties advocates say, the USPIS’ limited disclosure raises serious questions. “The idea of the government tracking that amount of mail is quite alarming,” says Jameel Jaffer, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s national security project. “When you realize that (the figure) does not include national security matters, the numbers are even more alarming.”Postal officials would not disclose the volume of mail monitored in national security investigations. Because those include terror-related inquiries, the figures do not show whether the Sept. 11 attacks influenced requests or approvals. In a Feb. 8 response to requests for information, inspection service counsel Anthony Alverno wrote that even revealing the frequency of the surveillance would undermine its effectiveness “to the detriment of the government’s national security interests.”Postal officials also would not discuss how much mail is being opened for content examinations, which do require a warrant authorized by a judge. USPIS spokesman Douglas Bem described the surveillance program as “one of many tools” available to investigators. “Regulations are in place that serve to protect the general population from illegal and unlawful intrusions,” Bem says. A 1978 federal appeals court decision upheld the use of such surveillance. Each request to monitor a sender’s mail can cover multiple letters and packages by the same suspects. Bem said the government does not track the total pieces of mail captured in the monitoring program.

_______________________________________________________________
 
Now, I am not one to agree with everything the ACLU stands for, but this is one area where I think they are dead on. In this article, it is revealed that the USPS does not need a warrant to search through the mail and packages sent through the mail system. I can go along with a judge’s warrant to search, which is the only way a search can be made in the correct manner, but a warrantless search approved by their own chief inspector is nothing more than unreasonable search and seizure. Did you know there is a law against that, USPS? It is called the fourth amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

So, it appears that according to this article, all the USPS needs is their own approval. Kind of sounds like the fox guarding the hen house, doesn’t it? And guess what, they are closely guarding this ability. See, until the article came to light, I did not know they had this authority. And honestly, I can see that due to sheer volume of mail and packages where it would be nearly impossible to get a warrant over each suspicious package.

So what to do? My suggestion is that the USPS return the package to the sender with a statement such as "Refused due to security reasons". Plus, if they want to notify the local authorities or the local FBI office, and allow them to pursue a warrant, they can do that. Why not just send the package to the FBI, and let them take care of the warrants and sender notification? Regardless of what they do, a warrant should be required, because the right of protection against unreasonable search and seizure must be preserved.

While the origin of the following paraphrased quote is argued, the truth is the same: "Those who would sacrifice a little liberty for a little security deserve neither."

Here is the link to the article: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-03-05-mail_N.htm