Archivists on the Issues: “Sensitive documents”, NARA’s role in declassification, and contested spaces

Archivists on the Issues is a forum for archivists to discuss the issues we are facing today. Today’s post comes from Burkely Hermann, Metadata Librarian for the National Security Archive and current I&A Blog Coordinator. There will be spoilers for RWBY Season 2.

A Schnee Dust Company representative warns Weiss Schnee that there are “sensitive documents” on the list of files Weiss requested in a season 2 episode of RWBY

Recently, I was rewatching the young adult animated series, RWBY, and forgot that there is an episode including a scene where one of the protagonists, Weiss Schnee, a daughter of an unscrupulous company executive, requests files from her parent’s company, the Schnee Dust Company (SDC). In the season two episode, “A Minor Hiccup”, Weiss uses a computer terminal, which she accesses at a CCT (Cross Continental Transmit System) Tower, a prominent part of Beacon Academy, using her scroll on the elevator to access the upper level, Once there, she is helped by a communications operator, who patches her through to the SDC. Once at a terminal, she is greeted by the SDC employee who looks at her file list and states that some of records are sensitive. Weiss responds that she will treat the records “with care”, and without even a second question, her request is fulfilled. [1] The records are later used in an effort to figure out more of what the “low-level” villain, Roman Torchwick, is doing. The claim by Weiss about the sensitive records relates to a recent interview with lawyer James Trusty.

Trusty defended his well-known client, the former president, stating there were no classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, and implied that not turning over documents was “not a crime”. He then claimed his client was being politically targeted, declared that the Presidential Records Act is a “non-criminal statute”, and said civil litigation is the answer instead, among other statements. The comments by Trusty on national television and those by Weiss in RWBY relate to what I’ve written about before in regards to how classification works within NARA (National Archives and Records Administration), British Public Record Office, South African State Archives Service, National Archives of Korea, United Nations, and other U.S. government organs and non-U.S. institutions. The aforementioned comments by Weiss and Trusty connect to the reality of document classification within archives, which remains an important issue considering a recent U.S. Senate hearing on over-classification, with calls for “original classifiers to assign sunsets at the front end,” i.e. dates at which classification would expire automatically, along with other changes, as the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) system remains thoroughly broken.

This is not a new issue, are classified records inherent to U.S. government institutions in many ways. For years, U.S. government agencies have been writing declassified institutional histories based upon the “still classified records of the services”, including about U.S. foreign relations. This is coupled with continuing complexities of record classification, leading to issues with obtaining access to “security-restricted records”. However, it can be bypassed thanks to sympathetic archivists or with the proper procedures in place. There have been cases in which classified records have been destroyed reportedly to “protect” operational security of U.S. military actions, even though the records should have been preserved. [2] This makes it clear that archives are not neutral, but are contested spaces instead, which is obvious for libraries, galleries, museums, and other institutions, but is also the case for archives.

There have been efforts to keep classified records intact and store them correctly. This has especially been the case after 1972 when the Archivist of the United States (AOTUS) became the center of government-wide policy-making in terms of research with classified records. Many years before, in March 1946, a National Archives appraiser, Philip C. Brooks, was worried about accepting “highly classified” records from the State Department about the Office of Strategic Services, due to the unknown size of the records being transferred, and had questions about record organization, issue of eventual declassification, and how these records would affect other transfers. Apart from the above-mentioned historical example, there have been instances in which researchers were denied from using classified records. On the contrary, declassification has been said to open up information for “intensive private historical research”. Some records at the U.S. state-level have also been classified, causing those in charge of the records to become declassifiers. [3]

In the past, the Pentagon had a room aside for storing classified records when agencies were reportedly under “extreme space pressures” as a result of World War II. This reality has only been reinforced by ever-present institutional resistance toward declassifying records for scholarly research due to a directive-of-sorts which instructs archivists to “guard” the security of classified records no matter what. This can involve classification for political purposes. [4] There have been evolving challenges from records classification and secrecy, archivists have opened older classified case files for historians, and declassification has become an important duty for NARA, especially since the 1970s. Further scholarship has focused on movement of classified materials, reviews of classified records by NARA, and continued pushes to declassify additional records. [5]

Recently, some have tried to differentiate between the different cases involving classified records involving the former president and President Biden, with Sharon L. Lynch of Reuters writing that neither president “should have had any classified material in their possession” and that such records should be in the “legal custody of the U.S. National Archives.” Lynch added that it is illegal to willfully or knowingly retain or remove classified material, and stated that failing to properly secure and store such material “poses risks to national security if it should fall into the wrong hands.” This has been so egregious in the case of the former president that one of his defense attorneys said the president used a folder with a classified marking to “block a light in his bedroom that kept him up at night”. The former president has further declared that he has the “right” to go through classified records which should have been handed over to NARA. In light of these recent scandals, some have called for NARA to adapt its protocols “around the handling of all classified documents” to prevent future scandals. [6]

All the while, there have been a defense of existing rules at the agency to safeguard records in opposition to those who state that there are too many rules, claims of “political bias”, questions about what NARA “knew” (or didn’t know) about classified records found at the office of the Penn-Biden Center, and laughable comments that such records were safer at Mar-a-Lago than at NARA. Others have praised the agency for its new agreement with the George W. Bush Foundation on a proposal to privatize the presidential library for George W. Bush by “transferring certain operations from NARA to the Bush Foundation” or called for a “revamping” at how the agency collects information, particularly classified information is Top Secret or Secret. [7] There have been broader comments about how it is fairly common to misplace classified documents (and “classified spillage” of documents outside “protected places”), and mentions of secure areas to view documents, known as SCIFs or Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities. Other articles have stated that many public officials have shared classified papers over the years, with some rightly questioning whether too many documents are being classified, or saying that the existing classification system is “clunky”. [8]

This is important to note because archivists, especially those at NARA, have a key role when it comes to declassification. Former AOTUS David Ferriero said the agency has a leadership role in ensuring that millions of classified records are “declassified and made available for the people to inspect and for historians to mine”. Archivists are like Weiss in that they are dedicated to treat classified documents “with care”, but their access to the records is not based on family relation. When it comes to classified documents, archivists become guards. People cannot copy documents held by NARA “with uncancelled security classification markings” and there are specific procedures for copying formerly national security-classified documents.

Classified records need to be more readily available to the public through more-common (or even mass) declassification, something which requires archivists to maintain their roles as declassifiers. More public availability of records will clash with the impossible institutional push to remain “neutral”, as the institutions are contested instead of “neutral”. In any case, archivists are vital since the amount of records, especially classified records from government agencies, flowing into institutions like NARA is bound to increase in years to come.

---

Notes

[1] The person she talks with tells her that she can talk to her sister Winter or her father but she says that she doesn’t want to, and her smile almost becomes a frown, implying a bad/fraught relationship.

[2] Nelson, Anna. “Government Historical Offices and Public Records.” The American Archivist 41, no. 4 (1978): 407-408; Hill, Edward. “Reviews.” The American Archivist 36, no. 2 (1973): 237; Herschler, David and William Slany. “The ‘Paperless Office’: A Case Study of the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Information System.” The American Archivist 45, no. 2 (1982): 151-152; Robinson-Sweet, Anna. “Truth and Reconciliation: Archivists as Reparations Activists.” The American Archivist 81, no. 1 (2018), doi: 10.17723/0360-9081-81.1.23; Soyka, Heather and Eliot Wilczek. “Documenting the American Military Experience in the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars.” The American Archivist 77, no. 1 (2014): 188, 191.

[3] Angel, Herbert. “Archival Janus: The Records Center.” The American Archivist 31, no. 1 (1968): 9; Heaps, Jennifer. “Tracking Intelligence Information: The Office of Strategic Services.” The American Archivist 61, no. 2 (1998): 301-302; Peterson, Trudy. “The National Archives and the Archival Theorist Revisited, 1954-1984.” The American Archivist 49, no. 2 (1986): 131; Harrison, Donald F. “World War II: A Bibliography of Books in English, 1945-1965” [Review]. The American Archivist 34, no. 4 (1971): 388; Epstein, Fritz. “Washington Research Opportunities in the Period of World War II.” The American Archivist 17, no. 3 (1954): 226; Baumann, Roland. “The Administration of Access to Confidential Records in State Archives: Common Practices and the Need for a Model Law.” The American Archivist 49, no. 4 (1986): 360, 364-365, 367.

[4] East, Sherrod. “Archival Experience in a Prototype Intermediate Depository.” The American Archivist 27, no. 1 (1964): 46, 51; Marrow, Mary. “Moving An Archives.” The American Archivist 53, no. 3 (1990): 423-424; Cox, Richard. “Secrecy, Archives, and the Archivist: A Review Essay (Sort Of).” The American Archivist 72, no. 1 (2009): 220-224, 227, 230.

[5] Leopold, Richard. “A Crisis of Confidence: Foreign Policy Research and the Federal Government.” The American Archivist 34, no. 2 (1971): 143-144; Rositer, Margaret (ed. Brenda Beasley Kepleyand Sara L. Stone). “Understanding Progress as Process: Documentation of the History of Post-War Science and Technology in the United States. Final Report of the Joint Committee on Archives of Science and Technology” [Review]. The American Archivist 47, no. 3 (1984): 298; Newman, Debra L. (ed. Brenda Beasley Kepleyand Sara L. Stone)  “The Marcus Garvey and Universal Negro Improvement Association Papers, Volume I: 1826-August 1919…[and] The Marcus Garvey and Universal Negro Improvement Association Papers, Volume II: August 1919-August 1920” [Review]. The American Archivist 47, no. 3 (1984): 309; Weir Jr., Thomas E. “News Notes.” The American Archivist 41, no. 4 (1978): 485; Goggin, Daniel T. and Carmen R. Delle Donne. “News Notes.” The American Archivist 36, no. 4 (1973): 606-607; Dowling, F.P. “News Notes.” The American Archivist 39, no. 3 (1976): 398-399; Dowling, F.P. “News Notes.” The American Archivist 39, no. 1 (1976): 83-84; Goggin, Daniel T. and Carmen R. Delle Donne. “News Notes.” The American Archivist 36, no. 2 (1973): 289-290.

[6] Meola, Lexi and Robert Weiner, “Op/Ed: Better protocols needed to keep classified documents out of the wrong house,” Indianapolis Star, Apr. 7, 2023.

[7] “Strict Rules at the National Archives Preserve Treasures,” Wall Street Journal, Mar. 30, 2023; Johnson, Ron, and Chuck Grassley. Electronic. “Sens. Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley Ask About Review of Classified Records By FBI and NARA.” Electronic, March 27, 2023 (also see here); “Fox’s Mark Levin: Classified documents are “safer at Mar-a-Lago” than “at the National Archives”,” Media Matters, Apr. 3, 2023; Rigby, David. “Petty Tyranny at the U.S. National Archives,” Wall Street Journal, Mar. 23, 2023; Quinn, Melissa and Arden Farhi, “National Archives says it retrieved nine boxes of Biden records from ex-personal attorney’s Boston office.” CBS News, Mar. 9, 2023; x, Connelly, Gerry. “Chairs Maloney, Connolly Issue Statements on Revised Agreement Between the National Archives and George W. Bush Foundation.” Nov. 16, 2022; Jacobson, Sheldon H. “Do classified document revelations highlight problems at the National Archives?” The Hill, Jan. 30, 2023.

[8] Waxman, Olivia B. “Classified Documents Get Misplaced All the Time. A Former National Archives Official Explains Why,” Time, accessed April 9, 2023;Herb, Jeremy, Katie Bo Lillis, Katelyn Polantz and Zachary Cohen, “‘I had to sleep with that document’: How the government tries to prevent classified government documents from spilling out,” CNN, Jan. 24, 2023; House, Billy. “Kissinger, Albright Among Officials Who Shared Classified Papers,” Bloomberg News, Mar. 9, 2023; Lopez, German. “Too Many Top Secrets,” New York Times, Jan. 27, 2023; “What Biden’s Documents Reveal About the Confusing Classification System,” Time, accessed Apr. 9, 2023;

June 12, 2023April 9, 2023 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Archivists on the IssuesTags: animation, AOTUS, archives security, Bush Library, chain of custody, classified records, declassification, FOIA, lawyers, NARA, patrons, Pentagon, preservation, presidential records, Presidential Records Act, RWBY, SCIFs, spies, State Department 2 Comments

The fate of history in the balance: The Seattle Federal Records Center still under threat

Archivists on the Issues is a forum for archivists to discuss the issues we are facing today. The following is from Burkely Hermann, recent graduate of the University of Maryland – College Park’s graduate program in Library and Information Science, with a concentration in Archives and Digital Curation.

On February 16, John C. Coughenour, a Reagan-appointee and Senior Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, blocked the sale of the National Archives facility at Seattle, one of the Federal Records Centers (FRC) in the U.S. with a preliminary injunction. This ended the movement of records from the facility to FRCs in Missouri and California, many of which are “un-digitized records.” He called the situation a “public relations disaster” of the Public Buildings Reform Board (PBRB), the entity which proposed the sale, and said that the PBRB had “a stunning lack of appreciation of the issues” of indigenous people. While the attorney generals of Washington State and Oregon applauded the decision, as did indigenous people, genealogists, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, and others, the fight is not over. The Stranger said that history “requires defending in the present,” The Cut argued that the fate of the Seattle FRC “remains undecided,” and MyNorthwest noted there is “more potential trouble” in the future if noting about the facility changes going forward. On February 18, local Seattle leaders and the governor of Oregon both wrote President Biden, calling on him to stop the sale of the facility. Even with the injunction, it is short-lived, meaning that the facility remains under threat. As such, it is important to once again, as I noted in February and November of last year, to explain the negative impact the closure of this facility will have on those in the Pacific Northwest and in the U.S. as a whole.

Over the past year, there have been legal efforts to delay the closure. Kim Wyman, the Secretary of State of Washington State, began meeting with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and other stakeholders, in hopes of brokering a solution to keep the archival materials, which document “history across the Pacific Northwest” in the state of Washington. At the same time, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson made filings in federal court, including the recent lawsuit which included almost 600 pages from indigenous peoples, individuals, and interested groups which attest to the value of the Seattle facility and materials which are held there. If the “nearly million” boxes of archival materials from the facility were moved to Missouri and California as planned, access to records about Asian American history would be made more difficult, as would records that relate to the “cultural preservation, history and treaty rights” of various indigenous nations in the Pacific Northwest. Moving the records to facilities in those states would make them less publicly accessible, destroying one of the “wellsprings” from which the “collective memory” of the region and nation is formed, as argued in the case in the amicus brief by the Korematsu Center. A recent successful lawsuit filed by Ferguson in early January, joined by 29 indigenous groups, and historic community and preservation groups, to stop the relocation and sale of the Seattle FRC, explains the problem succinctly:

“This action shows a callous disregard for the people who have the greatest interest in being able to access these profoundly important records…The facility contains the DNA of our region. It provides public access to permanent records created by Federal agencies and courts in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington…the National Archives at Seattle is the only property among those the PBRB recommended for sale that has profound importance to the region in which it is situated and is regularly used by members of the public…These irreplaceable archives are primarily un-digitized and do not exist elsewhere.”

The closure of the facility would violate NARA’s own principles to preserve and provide access to U.S. records and document U.S. history, especially those documents essential to U.S. government actions, rights of U.S. citizens, and any other records which “provide information of value to citizens.” It also runs afoul of NARA’s commitment to drive “openness, cultivate public participation” and strengthen U.S. democracy through “public access to high-value government records.” That same commitment states that NARA will lead the “archival and information professions to ensure archives thrive in a digital world.” That seems unlikely since only about 1% of the NARA’s record holdings are digitized and even less than 1% of presidential library records have been put online.

Furthermore, moving the records from Seattle to the FRCs in California, whether in Riverside or in San Francisco, and St. Louis, Missouri, would disregard the core values of archivists outlined by the Society of American Archivists. These core values state that archivists have a duty to foster greater access and use to records, maintain records which allow “contemporary and future entities” to seek accountability, serve as responsible “stewards for primary sources,” and root their “ethics of care that prioritizes sustainable practices and policies” when it comes to archival duties. The “boxes of information” within the Seattle FRC, highlighted by one local Seattle reporter, Matthew Smith, would be made less accessible if the records were moved elsewhere in the country. If the Seattle FRC is closed, it will be a sad day for archives, records, and preservation of U.S., indigenous, and community history.

Although the closure of the Seattle FRC has been halted by Judge Coughenour, this is only a temporary measure. In the short-term, you could contact the management team of NARA, especially chief archivist David Ferriero (david.ferriero@nara.gov), deputy chief archivist Debra Steidel Wall (debra.wall@nara.gov), and Chief Operating Officer William J. Bosanko (william.bosanko@nara.gov), and the PBRB at fastainfo@pbrb.gov, to express your opposition to the closure, while calling on President Biden to follow the judge’s decision and keep the facility open. In the long term, NARA needs increased funding and you can use the information put together by the Archival Researchers Association to contact your members of Congress to push for legislation which would increase the agency’s budget.

March 8, 2021December 5, 2022 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Archivists on the IssuesTags: archives closure, archives profession, federal records, genealogy, government archives, Indigenous people, legislation, memory institutions, NARA, National Archives at Seattle, presidential records, U.S. history 2 Comments

News Highlights: 2018 June

The I&A News Monitoring Research Team has compiled this list of recent news stories relating to archives, archivists, archival issues, and archival representations. This list was curated by SAA Issues & Advocacy News Monitoring Team, which includes Dana Bronson, Rachel Cohen, Samantha Cross, Shaun Hayes, and Beth Nevarez; it is managed by Steve Duckworth. More links and information are available in this month’s Google doc.

Acquisition, Preservation, & Access

• “Donald Trump is literally tearing up the trappings of the US presidency,” https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/11/politics/donald-trump-presidential-record/index.html
• “Meet the guys who tape Trump’s papers back together,” https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/10/trump-papers-filing-system-635164

Archival Finds & Stories

• “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History,” https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/25/nyregion/new-york-city-public-housing-history.html
• “The Story of Orra White Hitchcock and the Women Whose Modesty Hides Their Talent,” https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/orra-white-hitchcock_us_5b1fe959e4b09d7a3d777cc5
• “The secret cities where the atomic bomb was built,” https://www.cnn.com/style/article/manhattan-project-cities-exhibition/index.html

Digital Archives, Technology, & the Web

• “‘Ultra-technologists’ to open digital-only museum in Tokyo,” https://www.cnn.com/videos/arts/2018/06/19/teamlab-digital-art-museum-opening-tokyo.cnn

Exhibits & Museums

• “These High Schoolers are Calling for a National Disability History Museum by Making Their Own,” http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018/07/04/national-disability-history-museum-high-schoolers
• “Keith Haring Mural in Amsterdam is Uncovered After Nearly 30 Years,” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/arts/design/keith-haring-amsterdam.html
• “Swahili, the Pulse of Life at the Crossroads,” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/14/arts/design/swahili-the-pulse-of-life-at-the-crossroads.html
• “A Trip to Philadelphia’s Museum of the American Revolution,” http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018/07/04/museum-american-revolution-july-fourth
• “To Remember Rosewood, An Effort to turn Its Last House into a Museum,” http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018/06/25/rosewood-florida-massacre
• “Native Americans have participated in every major US military encounter. A memorial to honor them is coming,” https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/27/us/smithsonian-native-american-memorial-trnd/index.html

Human & Civil Rights, Equality, & Health

• “How This Magazine Cover Sent a Man on a Journey to Find His Queer Asian Elders,” https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/queer-asian-american-history_us_5b33d3f5e4b0b745f17a3248
• “British exhibition goes back 11,000 years to highlight LGBT history,” https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-museum-lgbt/british-exhibition-goes-back-11000-years-to-highlight-lgbt-history-idUSKBN1JM2EY
• “Meet Westboro Baptist Church’s Soon-To-Be Neighbor: A Marriage Equality Museum,” https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hate-thy-neighbor-a-marriage-equality-museum-under-construction-across-from-westboro-baptist-church_us_5b3238eae4b03b6966b993ff
• “Benin bronzes: Will Britain return Nigeria’s stolen treasures?” https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/29/africa/nigerias-stolen-treasures/index.html
• “Nine sacred artifacts stolen from a Native American tribe are finally returned over 100 years later,” https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/11/us/native-american-artifacts-returned-trnd/index.html

July 13, 2018June 23, 2022 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Research PostTags: cultural heritage, Google Workspace, human rights, Indigenous people, LGBTQ+, memorials, military history, museums, News Highlights, oral history, preservation, presidential records, repatriation, stolen artifacts, technology, U.S. history 1 Comment

News Highlights: 2018 May

The I&A News Monitoring Research Team has compiled this list of recent news stories relating to archives, archivists, archival issues, and archival representations. This list was curated by SAA Issues & Advocacy News Monitoring Team, which includes Dana Bronson, Rachel Cohen, Samantha Cross, Shaun Hayes, and Beth Nevarez; it is managed by Steve Duckworth. More links and information are available in this month’s Google doc.

 

Acquisition, Preservation, & Access

• Bob Geldof’s Band Aid archive arrives in Ireland https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/bob-geldofs-band-aid-archive-arrives-in-ireland-36869725.html
• Barack Obama gives a new twist on the presidential library https://www.fastcompany.com/40567046/barack-obama-gives-us-a-new-twist-on-the-presidential-library

Archival Finds & Stories

• The ‘Grey Gardens’ Ladies Were the Unwitting Godmothers of Reality TV Archetypes https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/grey-gardens-that-summer-documentary_us_5afdd6e8e4b0a59b4e01e1f3
• Researchers Uncover Secret Pages in Diary of Anne Frank https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anne-frank-diary-pages-uncovered_us_5afc22c0e4b0a59b4dff4e1a
• Donald Glover’s ‘This Is America,’ Through The Eyes of a Jim Crow Historian https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-glover-this-is-america-jim-crow-history_us_5af31588e4b00a3224efcc40
• Thousands of undelivered letters, some with ‘heart-wrenching’ stories, to be posted online https://abcnews.go.com/International/thousands-undelivered-letters-heart-wrenching-stories-posted-online/story?id=55214973
• Military archives: Pension files highlight role of women in Irish wars and IRA’s 1922 massacre https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/analysis/military-archives-pension-files-highlight-role-of-women-in-irish-wars-and-iras-1922-massacre-842179.html

Exhibits & Museums

• At the Met, a Riveting Testament to Those Once Neglected https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/arts/design/history-refused-to-die-review-outsider-art-met-museum.html
• ‘Painted in Mexico’: When a New Art Flourished Far From Mother Spain https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/10/arts/design/review-painted-in-mexico-metropolitan-museum-of-art-.html
• Here’s a Look at Orlando’s Interim Pulse Nightclub Memorial https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pulse-interim-memorial-photos_us_5af32e35e4b09bb419e4585d
• Egypt’s new one-billion dollar museum https://www.cnn.com/videos/arts/2018/06/05/grand-egyptian-museum-treasures-style-orig.cnn/video/playlists/mobile-digital-shorts/

Human & Civil Rights, Equality, & Health

• Berlin Museum Returns Artifacts to Indigenous People of Alaska https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/arts/design/berlin-museum-artifacts-chugach-alaska.html
• Decolonizing the Art Museum: The Next Wave https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/01/opinion/decolonizing-art-museums.html
• A search for native children who died on ‘Outings’ in PA http://www.philly.com/philly/news/indian-school-carlisle-native-quaker-cemetery-outing-20180502.html
• Excavations at Chile torture site offer new hope for relatives of disappeared https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/02/chile-disappeared-excavations-colonia-dignidad

Security & Privacy

• Those ancient artifacts that were illegally smuggled to Hobby Lobby are headed home to Iraq https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/02/us/iraq-artifacts-return-hobby-lobby/index.html

The Profession

• Lacma and Arizona State Join Forces to Help Curators of Color https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/arts/design/lacma-arizona-state-curators-of-color.html

June 9, 2018June 23, 2022 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Research PostTags: archives profession, BIPOC, Black history, curators, decolonizing archives, Egyptian history, Google Workspace, gun violence, guns, Indigenous people, Iraqi history, LGBTQ+, memorials, Mexican history, military history, museums, News Highlights, preservation, presidential records, Presidential Records Act, records management, repatriation, Research Teams, stolen artifacts, torture, U.S. history 1 Comment

Legis* Research Team: Updates Regarding Legislation and Legislator Actions

The Legis* Research Team monitors the intersection of archives issues and legislative resources and concerns, legislative bills, and individual legislators. This post, part of our Research Post series, was written by Katharina Hering, Mark Prindiville, Ashley Levine, and Lindsay Hiltunen.

In the past several months, I have focused on monitoring opposition against the Immigration and Custom’s Enforcement’s (ICE) “Visa Lifecycle Vetting Initiative” (VLVI), formerly called the “Extreme Vetting Initiative” (EVI) in and outside of Congress. On April 5, 2018, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), Ranking Member of the Committee on Homeland Security, Rep. Filemon Vela (D-TX), Ranking Member of the Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee, and Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-NY), Ranking Member of the Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee, sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen urging her to halt the VLVI. “The Trump Administration’s extreme vetting initiative must be stopped.  Not only will it be ineffective and inaccurate, but will certainly be discriminatory and unjustly target certain communities. ICE’s intention to build a program with unknown limits to search social media platforms demonstrates a disregard for privacy, due process, and the rights to free speech and free association. This initiative will undoubtedly chill free speech online.” In March 2018, citing concerns raised by the Brennan Center for Justice and other civil liberties and civil rights organizations about the Extreme Vetting Initiative, the Congressional Black Caucus, via letter, requested that DHS suspends all activities related to the VLVI.

Among the groups opposing the VLVI were the Archivists Round Table of Metropolitan New York (ART) and the Concerned Archivists Alliance.

Several civil rights, civil liberties and privacy rights organizations provide regular updates on the opposition against the VLVI, including the Center for Democracy and Technology, National Immigration Law Center, Georgetown’s Center for Privacy and Technology, and the Brennan Center for Justice, among others.

— Katharina Hering

Senator Gary Peters of Michigan voted in favor of banking deregulation on March 6, 2018, as well as his fellow Michigander, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, and 14 other Democratic Senators. Coincidentally, both Peters and Stabenow have history with banking lobbyists, as campaign and leadership PAC donations from securities and investments have been found via OpenSecrets.org. Peters has received $726,879, while Stabenow has obtained $587,939, ironically including corporate/PAC donations into the realm of the gender wage gap issue.
— Mark Prindiville

In following the activities of the TV, radio, and internet news program, Democracy Now!, the legislator, Tom Cotton (R-AR), and the legislation, H.R. 3923:  Dignity for Detained Immigrants Act of 2017 (Sponsored by Adams Smith, D-WA), failures of government accountability in documenting abuse of undocumented persons by government agencies (e.g. U.S. Immigrations Customs Enforcement, a.k.a. ICE) amid simultaneous efforts to bolster aggressive immigration enforcement policies, are increasingly apparent.

The Democracy Now! website dedicates a section entirely to reporting on immigration issues in the United States. Articles bearing headlines like, “Immigration and Customs Enforcement to Allow Jailing of Pregnant Women,” to, “Immigration Activists Fight to End ICE Arrests at Courthouses,” and, “17 States Sue Trump Administration over Census Citizenship Question,” highlight the current administration’s efforts to crackdown on immigration from non-European (i.e. non-white) nations, and terrorize undocumented people within the U.S. These reports underscore concrete steps taken by ICE to simultaneously increase surveillance of immigrant communities (through data gathering mechanisms, such as the “Visa Lifecycle Vetting” initiative), and double-down on aggressive detainment activities (raids on courthouses, communities, and sanctuary cities). ICE activities are shrouded in secrecy, while ICE leadership neglects to adequately explain its extralegal actions.

Tom Cotton’s legislative activities mirror those of the administration in which he serves. For example, last year Senator Cotton sponsored S. 354: RAISE Act, which aims to limit illegal immigration by significantly reducing several provisions of U.S. policy that encourage legal immigration. S. 354 would end the Diversity Visa Program, a State Department initiative that grants an additional 50,000 legal permanent resident visas each year from countries with low rates of U.S. immigration. This bill also aims to reduce the number of family-sponsored immigrants, as well as cap number of refugees around the world offered U.S. permanent residency to 50,000. Tom Cotton also sponsored S. 1720: RAISE Act, a bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to establish a skills-based immigration points system.

Meanwhile, since its introduction in October 2017, H.R. 3923:  Dignity for Detained Immigrants Act of 2017, has seen no action made in the House. This bill aims to provide standards for facilities where undocumented persons in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security (ICE) are detained. Since ICE’s inception in 2003, and up to 2015, 150 individuals died in the agency’s custody. Furthermore, the immigration detainee watchdog group, Community Initiatives for Visiting Immigrants in Confinement (CIVIC), highlighted 14,693 reported incidents of sexual and physical abuse in ICE detention centers from 2010 to 2016, with just about 1 percent of these reports actually resulting in investigations. ICE has even reversed its policy of not detaining pregnant women, as reports of multiple confirmed miscarriages and  inadequate medical care in ICE detention facilities have come to light. This new policy follows President Trump’s Muslim Ban, “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,” from January 2017, which has led to increased interior enforcement across the country.

— Ashley Levine

The most active monitoring I have been doing lately stems from the National Coalition for History. An active advocate for many important policy issues that impact archives, libraries, and other cultural heritage institutions, the National Coalition for History has been doing a lot of work to keep the issue of Humanities funding in the forefront. Member organizations represent thousands of historians, genealogists, archivists, teachers, students, and other stakeholders, so they are keeping current on issues that impact those professions and the communities served. Active social media campaigns have been highlighting some of these efforts, as well as collaboration with other non-profit educational organizations to encourage face-to-face and other modes of history-related advocacy. Current goals and accomplishments that impact the archives profession include working to prevent the elimination of the National Historical Publications and Records Commission, an important source of funding for archives across the country, and leading the effort to pass the Presidential & Federal Records Reform Act. The National History Coalition has an active social media presence, so be sure to check them out on Facebook and Twitter, or historycoalition.org, to get a sense of current advocacy work and major accomplishments.

— Lindsay Hiltunen

May 8, 2018June 23, 2022 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Research PostTags: archives profession, Concerned Archivists Alliance, detention and arrest, federal records, gender oppression, gender pay gap, GLAM institutions, immigration, immigration policy, legislation, Muslim ban, National Coalition of History, news media, presidential records, Research Teams, undocumented immigrants, Whiteness Leave a comment

Mid-Year Steering Share: Breaking the Silence

Steering Shares are an opportunity to find out more about the I&A Steering Committee. This post is from Daria Labinsky, an archivist at the National Archives in St. Louis, who works primarily with 20^thcentury military personal data records. The Mid-Year Steering Share was developed to discuss projects currently active or recently completed, either personal or professional.

In my first Steering Share, I mentioned that one of my greatest concerns is the deliberate or accidental creation of archival silences by record creators and keepers. When I wrote that post, I did not foresee how relevant this concern would become. Tweets that may be federal records are being deleted, and White House staff may be using private email accounts and encryption/deletion software to conduct government business.

And it’s possible (probable?) that efforts to hide or destroy information concerning the operations and motives of the administration will only increase. As the group Concerned Archivists has pointed out in A Statement to the Archival Community, the president’s corporations destroyed emails in defiance of court orders before he was elected.

The Federal Records Act states, “Electronic messages created or received in a personal account meeting the definition of a Federal record must be forwarded to an official electronic messaging account within 20 days.”  Likewise, the Presidential Records Act, states that the president, vice president, or member of their immediate staff may not create or send a presidential or vice presidential record using a non-official electronic message account unless they copy it to an official account or resend it via an official account within 20 days.

Some of the president’s tweets on his personal account, but not all, have been retweeted on @POTUS, the official account.

As for the deleted tweets, under 44 U.S. Code § 2209 the president could argue that they are personal records of “purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.”

Shontavia Johnson, professor of intellectual property law at Drake University, offers a well written and thorough dissection of the relevant issues in “Donald Trump’s tweets are now presidential records.” She closes with, “To create a full digital picture of Trump’s presidency, we may have to rely on the screenshots from private citizens or others.” Entities such as Pro Publica, whose Politwoops is capturing deleted tweets to the best of its ability, and the Internet Archive, which launched the Trump Archive to collect televised material, are among those answering her call. While these wouldn’t be federal records covered under the laws pertaining to them, they are admirable attempts to keep history from vanishing.

There are also efforts under way by public officials to fight potential historical silences. Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) introduced a bill to strengthen federal records laws. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who co-chairs the Congressional Transparency Caucus, has emphasized the need to demand transparency from the presidential administration as well as from Congress.  Sens. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Tom Carper (D-Del.) are investigating whether any laws were broken by administration staffers who were using the private email accounts.

It’s sad that any of this has to be dealt with in the first place, but it is refreshing that vigilance is not defined by party lines. The efforts of these and other people and organizations give me hope that we can turn the silence into noise.

The contents of this message are Daria’s personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Federal government or the National Archives and Records Administration.

February 16, 2017June 23, 2022 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Steering ShareTags: archival silences, corporate power, emails, federal records, Federal Records Act, Internet Archive, personal papers, presidential records, Presidential Records Act, public records laws Leave a comment

The Clinton Emails and Proper Digital Records Storage

Archivists on the Issues is a forum for archivists to discuss the issues we are facing today. Below is a post from Hilary Barlow about the the Clinton email scandal and government digital record storage. If you have an issue you would like to write about for this blog series or a previous post that you would like to respond to, please email archivesissues@gmail.com. Please note that opinions expressed in Archivists on the Issues posts do not indicate an official stance of SAA or the Issues and Advocacy Roundtable.

As Hillary Clinton is now the Democratic nominee for President of the United States, it’s worth remembering that her issues with email are part of the federal government’s checkered history with proper digital record storage. As Secretary of State, Clinton was not the first federal official to hide emails in a private server. In 2007, it came to light the Bush Administration officials did the same thing, with Karl Rove et al holding the bag. But Hillary Clinton’s emails shouldn’t just be a Republican talking point. Even if she isn’t the first, her blatant abuse of proper records practices, along with the inability or disinclination of others to sanction her actions, are a discouraging portent for the future of digital recordkeeping in the highest echelons of American government.

On July 5, FBI Director James Comey revealed that, while he found that Clinton had sent and received confidential information via her private email server, he was not recommending that she be indicted by the Department of Justice. On July 12, Attorney General Loretta Lynch backed Comey’s recommendation. Details about Clinton’s record-keeping practices were already troubling, more specifics have come to light.

It first became apparent that Clinton was using a private email account in March 2013, when a hacker accessed the email of her aide Sidney Blumenthal. The existence of the account received wider attention in the summer of 2014 when the House Select Committee on Benghazi realized that there were no official emails belonging to Clinton in State Department records. Since then, the emails have been a target for anti-Clinton Republicans and an election talking point.

Clinton turned over around 30,000 emails to the State Department in December 2014. Comey revealed on July 5 that many e-mails were lost in transfers from old to new servers, and that his team uncovered e-mails outside of the surrendered 30,000 that had either been lost in those transfers or deleted. Clinton has claimed the deleted emails were personal, which may be true, but since they were taken out of official recordkeeping channels completely history will never know for certain. The provenance of Clinton’s State Department emails is complicated to say the least and permanently so.

In March of 2015, the SAA issued a statement expressing concern at the use of non-governmental e-mails by government officials in general and Clinton in particular. The Council noted 2014 amendments to the Federal Records Act and the Presidential Records Act “to prohibit the use of private email accounts by government officials unless they copy or forward any such emails into their government account within 20 days.”

Though the amendments were finalized after Clinton had completed her term as Secretary of State, there have been questions about whether Clinton violated the Act as it stood during her term, as well as the State Department Foreign Affairs Manual. Comey stated during a House Oversight Committee hearing that he believed Clinton had violated the Federal Records Act, at least “in some respects.” Attorney General Loretta Lynch went a step further than Comey, stating that the Federal Records Act was not under the purview of the investigation.

As President, Clinton would be expected to abide by the 2014 amendments to the Presidential Records Act. Similar to the Federal Records Act amendments, in which government officials are expected to use an official email and forward emails to official channels within 20 days if a personal account is used, the Presidential Records Act puts the burden of compliance is specifically on the President and Vice-President.

Comey noted in his statement to the press on July 5 that while Clinton would not be prosecuted, other individuals could face “security or administrative sanctions” in similar circumstances. The heavy implication is that low-level staff are likely to face consequences that higher-level officials can avoid. This sets a troubling precedent, not only for Clinton’s likely presidential administration, but for digital recordkeeping in the federal government overall. Alongside the Bush Administration email scandal in 2007, there is a bipartisan pattern of misplaced emails. Adding the complacency of both Comey and Lynch creates an overall picture of disregard for these issues.

What can we expect from Hillary Clinton’s administration and future administrations with regard to record-keeping and overall transparency? And no, I don’t think Donald Trump would be better on any of these issues. I shudder to even think of the information practices under his administration, but regardless of who is in the White House this case will set an important precedent. Ultimately, effective documentation thrives in an environment of clear standards, consistent application and a culture of accountability. This is a systemic issue bigger than Hillary Clinton, though her role as a major presidential contender and former Secretary of State should not be underestimated. The weak responses from Comey and Lynch are alarming because of the implications for the culture of accountability in the federal government surrounding these issues, and the pattern they set for future records practices.

One would hope that the 2014 amendments to the Federal Records Act and President Records Act will spur Clinton and others to properly store records for posterity. Since Hillary Clinton has been dogged by the email issue throughout her campaign, perhaps her administration will be more attentive to digital records to avoid future scandal. Personally, I will be very interested in seeing how a Hillary Clinton administration will handle records.

Hilary Barlow earned her Master of Information degree in 2015 from the University of Toronto. She currently works as a Preservation & Digitization Technician at Penn State University.

August 19, 2016June 24, 2022 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Archivists on the IssuesTags: digital access, digitization, emails, FBI, federal records, Federal Records Act, personal archives, presidential records, Presidential Records Act, provenance, record storage, records management, SAA, transparency Leave a comment

National Tracing Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Archivists on the Issues is a forum for archivists to discuss the issues we are facing today. Below is a post from Steve Duckworth and Steve Ammidown about the problem of records management and the ATF’s National Tracing Center. If you have an issue you would like to write about for this blog series or a previous post that you would like to respond to, please email archivesissues@gmail.com.

Let’s talk about guns. And records management. And maybe some advocacy.

According to their website, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is:

 a law enforcement agency … that protects our communities from violent criminals, criminal organizations, the illegal use and trafficking of firearms, the illegal use and storage of explosives, acts of arson and bombings, acts of terrorism, and the illegal diversion of alcohol and tobacco products. [They] partner with communities, industries, law enforcement, and public safety agencies to safeguard the public [they] serve through information sharing, training, research, and use of technology.

That’s a big job. But as we’re about to see, “information sharing” and the “use of technology” are pretty restricted at the ATF.

The National Tracing Center (NTC) is the firearms tracing facility of the ATF. Located in Martinsburg, WV, they are the only facility in the United States that can provide information to law enforcement agencies (local, state, federal, and international) that can be used to trace firearms in criminal investigations, gun trafficking, and other movement of firearms, both domestically and internationally. And they are drowning in records. From recent reports, roughly 1.6 million records arrive at the facility each month. Records usually come from defunct firearms dealers who are required to submit their records when they go out of business. (For dealers still in business, the NTC contacts them after tracing a weapon through its manufacturer.) There appear to be no standards in place for how dealers have to keep or submit these records. There is a form (4473) for the actual gun purchase, but other records can come in on computer media or hand-written documents. They often arrive somewhat damaged, with partially shredded or water-damaged records being frequently cited in news reports. Some people even send theirs in on rolls of toilet paper.

As it is currently illegal to create a registry of firearms in the U.S., the idea of a searchable database is also off the table. This leaves workers at the facility with the task of sifting through these records manually to complete traces. Upwards of 365,000 traces are requested each year, and the number will just keep growing (due in part to the Obama administration’s requirement that every gun involved in a crime be traced). While records are now being digitized to provide some easier access and relief for the physical space needed, the records remain non-searchable and amount to a newer version of microfilmed records.

Some of the problems at the NTC can be traced to the lack of consistent leadership and chronic underfunding. The position of the agency director was unfilled from 2006 to 2013 due to legislation backed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) that requires Senate confirmation to fill the position. In 2013, acting director B. Todd Jones was narrowly confirmed to fill the Director role, but he retired soon after (in 2015) and the position has yet to be filled permanently. Stagnant funding has prevented the ATF from keeping up with demand. In addition to the overwhelmed workers at NTC, the agency has just over 600 inspectors dedicated to inspecting the record-keeping at over 140,000 gun dealers across the country.

The data collected by the NTC is also subject to the NRA’s legislative sway in Washington. As mentioned, they have been successful in heading off any attempts at creating a searchable database, arguing that such a mechanism would be a “registry” in violation of the Second Amendment. Taking it one step further, a set of provisions known as the “Tiahrt Amendments” has been attached to every U.S. Department of Justice appropriations bill since 2003, prohibiting the NTC from releasing information to anyone other than a law enforcement agency or prosecutor in connection with a criminal investigation. The law effectively blocks this data from being used in academic research on criminal gun use or in civil lawsuits against gun sellers or manufacturers. It also prevents the ATF from collecting the inventory information from gun dealers, which would further help identify lost or stolen guns. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence argues that these amendments only empower criminals and reckless dealers.

Restrictive laws and a lack of quality management lead to a massive backlog of records and a very limited system of filling the great number of trace requests the NTC receives. The antiquated measures required by the NTC restrict law enforcement’s ability to perform their duties. While public opinion regarding gun sales seems to be turning (unlike Congress’s voting record), the idea of a database seems quite far off. An effective and permanent director at the ATF would be a good starting place, but as of this writing, a nomination doesn’t appear to even be in place (and given the upcoming election, it’s not likely to happen anytime soon).

Not unlike the rest of the gun debate, the political debate around the NTC and gun tracing data seems intractable and unlikely to change. Luckily for us, however, we’re archivists and records managers! We offer a unique perspective on this subject when we contact our elected officials on this topic. We’ve been in the dusty stacks (yes, we said it) and dealt with unwieldy access systems when time was of the essence. We should be arguing for the modernization and full funding of the NTC and the repeal of the Tiahrt Amendments, at the least to improve access to government information and at the most to help save lives. So consider this your call to advocacy (as mentioned at the start). If you feel this situation warrants some action, take it and contact your legislators now!

 News/Links:

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), https://www.atf.gov

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Maintaining Records on Gun Sales,” http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-dealer-sales/maintaining-records-on-gun-sales/

National Tracing Center (NTC), https://www.atf.gov/firearms/national-tracing-center, (informational brochure: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/national-tracing-center-information-industry-members-atf-p-331210/download)

National Tracing Center via Wikipedia (good general overview), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Tracing_Center

The White House, “Presidential Memorandum – Tracing of Firearms in Connection with Criminal Investigations,” https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/01/16/presidential-memorandum-tracing-firearms-connection-criminal-investigati

 News reports:

2016 March 24, America’s 1^st Freedom [NRA magazine], “Where the ATF Scans Gun Sales Records,” https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2016/3/24/where-the-atf-scans-gun-sales-records/

2016 January 6, The Guardian, “Agency tasked with enforcing Obama’s gun control measures has been gutted,” https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/06/bureau-alcohol-tobacco-firearms-obama-gun-control-measures-funding-understaffing

2015 October 27, USA Today, “Millions of Firearms Records Languish at National Tracing Center” http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/10/27/firearms-national-tracing-center-atf/74401060/

2015 March 20, USA Today, “ATF director announces resignation,” http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/20/atf-director-b-todd-jones-resigns/25081713/

2013 June 11, Media Matters, “How the NRA Hinders the ATF Director Confirmation Process,” http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/06/11/how-the-nra-hinders-the-atf-director-confirmati/194412

2013 May 20, NPR, “The Low-Tech Way Guns Get Traced,” http://www.npr.org/2013/05/20/185530763/the-low-tech-way-guns-get-traced

2013 March 13, InformationWeek, “ATF’s Gun Tracing System is a Dud,” http://www.informationweek.com/applications/atfs-gun-tracing-system-is-a-dud/d/d-id/1109062

2013 February 19, WJLA ABC7 (Washington, D.C.), “ATF National Tracing Center Traces Guns the Old-Fashioned Way,” http://wjla.com/news/nation-world/atf-national-tracing-center-traces-guns-the-old-fashioned-way-85417 (YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lFdLaYcDNQ)

2013 January 30, CBS Evening News, “Tracing Guns is Low-tech Operation for ATF,” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tracing-guns-is-low-tech-operation-for-atf/

2011 November 2, Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Federal Law on Tiahrt Amendments,” http://smartgunlaws.org/federal-law-on-tiahrt-amendments/

2010 October 26, Washington Post, “ATF’s Oversight Limited in Face of Gun Lobby,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/25/AR2010102505823.html

Steve Duckworth is the Processing Archivist at the University of Florida where he wrangles and tames all sorts of archival collections. Previously, he has held roles with the National Park Service in Anchorage, AK and the PACSCL/CLIR Hidden Collections Project in Philadelphia, PA.

Steve Ammidown is the Manuscripts and Outreach Archivist for the Browne Popular Culture Library at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio.

July 7, 2016June 24, 2022 by issuesandadvocacy Categories: Archivists on the IssuesTags: databases, government archives, gun laws, gun violence, guns, legislation, presidential records, records management, Wikipedia 2 Comments