PA AG's Twitter Subpoena Also Told Twitter It Couldn't Reveal Subpoena's Existence
from the gag-clause dept
Back in May, we wrote about how Pennsylvania Attorney General (and gubernatorial candidate), Tom Corbett, had sent a subpoena to Twitter demanding the identity of an online critic, who he believed to be a former state employee who had been convicted and was facing sentencing in a political corruption scandal. While Corbett dropped the subpoena after the guy was sentenced (and there was widespread criticism of his actions), the legal community continues to scold him for his actions. A recent article highlights that not only did he send the subpoena, but the coverletter of the subpoena ordered Twitter not to reveal the existence of the subpoena -- even to the account holder. In fact, it told Twitter that if it wanted to reveal the existence of the subpoena to anyone, it first had to contact the Attorney General's office, so that it could seek an order prohibiting revealing the subpoena:"Should you decide that you wish to disclose the existence of this subpoena and its contents to anyone, including the account holder, it is requested that you contact the deputy attorney general named on your subpoena and so advise him or her before any disclosure so he or she can determine whether or not to seek a court order from the supervising judge prohibiting disclosures under section 4549(d) of the Investigating Grand Jury Act, 42 Pa. C.S. 4549 (d)."So not only was he seeking to out an anonymous critic, he wanted to make sure no one -- least of all the guy who's identity was at stake -- was able to know about it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: free speech, pennsylvania, subpoena, tom corbett
Companies: twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
That legalese has more holes than a colander
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That legalese has more holes than a colander
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: That legalese has more holes than a colander
No, he's saying that the 'request' is bogus and should be treated as such (of course, you'll likely get hit with the court hammer since the AG has little accountability.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That legalese has more holes than a colander
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's my proposed response
Thank you for telescoping the fact that you haven't yet obtained such an order preventing me from publishing. Here's some copy that I sent to the account holder,the NYTimes and 100 of the top-rated blogs on the internet.
Please be assured that, if you do actually get off your fat a** and obtain such an order, I will do everything within my power to convince those people to not use that copy in future.
Yours insincerely,
JSG.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here's my proposed response
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wonder...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I wonder...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So what's your point?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So what's your point?
I think the attempted coverup is the issue here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So what's your point?
We explained it in the original post. Abusing the power of your office to unmask anonymous critics is highly questionable and an abuse of power.
To then try to cover it up and tell third parties they cannot discuss a subpoena is quite troubling, don't you think?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No judge approved the subpoena. You didn't even read the article (actually I got caught for doing that before, lol).
"I'd like an expert opinion."
It doesn't take an expert to read the article.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LOLWROTFATPMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PA AG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I wonder...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Corbett is well-known as a rights usurper
Hitler-esque contempt for the first amendment, to his claim that he keeps a separate cell phone for campaigning for Governor while in office as PA AG, the man is a hypocrite and a tyrant waiting to happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]