For a period last month, it looked as though trying to borrow a copy of Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung from the campus library could trigger a visit from federal agents.
At least that's what America thought when a University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth student told one of his professors that he was questioned by agents from the Department of Homeland Security after requesting Mao's book through an interlibrary loan.
But a week later the student confessed to making the whole thing up, casting a media spotlight on how university libraries -- including Penn's -- deal with national security issues.
"For us, it's been disturbing. It's put a bad light on our university, it's put a bad light on our library," UMass-Dartmouth interim Dean of Library Services Ann Smith said in an interview. "It's very unfortunate that the student made up his story."
The likelihood of a federal agent interrogating a student after checking out a questionable book is slim, according to Smith and Sandra Kerbel, director of public services for Penn's libraries.
Both the UMass-Dartmouth and Penn libraries do not retain patrons' borrowing records once they have returned materials, making an investigation almost impossible to initiate.
"Once you return an item, we have disassociated the link," Kerbel said. "If you checked out materials and you returned them all ...we have no direct link in our catalog between what you had out now that you've returned it.
The Patriot Act, which Congress extended until Feb. 3 at the end of its December session, has been criticized by Democrats and civil libertarians. The law, which expands the power of intelligence-gathering agencies, will expire unless renewed by Congress. The American Civil Liberties Union has called for letting the act expire "protect American freedoms."
One provision of the Patriot Act allows federal law enforcement agents to monitor library patrons' borrowing activity without informing them and without judicial oversight. The Act also bars librarians from publicly discussing any requests from law enforcement.
"The Penn Library took a good step in protecting civil liberties and privacy rights" by opting not to retain borrowing records, said Penn ACLU co-President and Wharton senior Vikas Didwania.
"We're opposed to the most glaring provisions of the Patriot Act," Didwania added. "We support revising the Patriot Act so that the library wouldn't have to go through these steps" of deleting patron records.
However, College Republicans co-Chairman and College sophomore Michael Shiely said the entire Patriot Act "has been very important to combating terrorism and [protecting] freedoms and civil liberties."
Shiely's group supports the act, and he said "there [is] no record of the library provisions even being used ... let alone abused by investigators."
Kerbel said that while "there's a discomfort level about the Patriot Act among libraries because [they] have a history of protecting [patron] records," she cannot "remember a time where [a library has] actually disclosed information."
Smith said she has never even been contacted by law enforcement agencies and does not know anyone who has been.
If a law enforcement agency contacted the Penn Library, its request would be directed to Kerbel and closely examined by the University's Office of General Counsel.
"We feel strongly about protecting the rights of our users and [that] the library is one place you can go and ask any question you want, you can check out anything you want ... and you're free to do your research," said Kerbel.
