The Senate Judiciary Committee approved five members for the Privacy and...
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved five members for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board on Thursday despite the concerns of Ranking Member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. The nominees are: David Medine, partner with WilmerHale, as chairman; James Dempsey, vice president…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
at the Center for Democracy and Technology; Elisebeth Cook, partner with Freeborn & Peters; Rachel Brand, chief counsel for regulatory litigation at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; and Patricia Wald, former judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The committee approved Medine by a 10-8 vote along partisan lines, while the other four members were approved by a voice vote and their names sent to the floor for a full vote. Grassley opposed the confirmation of Medine due to “serious concerns” about the nominee’s views on profiling foreign nationals from high risk countries. “Specifically Mr. Medine noted that it would be inappropriate for the federal government to profile foreign nationals from high risk countries based solely on the country of origin,” said Grassley. “This is troubling.” Grassley had previously expressed his concern over the “broad mandate” of the board and its mission (CD April 19 p14). The board was established in 2004, following a recommendation by the 9/11 commission, but the Senate failed to approve its members. TechFreedom, in a statement following the vote, called the committee’s vote “a long-overdue victory for privacy and the rule of law.” The board is “more necessary than ever as Congress careens towards passing cybersecurity legislation that, while well-intentioned, could allow radical new intrusions by government into our private communications without traditional safeguards,” the group said.