Insights
Publications

Unreviewed Preservation Requests Likely to Continue

August 12, 2019 Articles

The Ninth Circuit recently heard an appeal that challenges a common tool of law enforcement: “f” letters.

Under section 2703(f) of the Stored Communications Act, law enforcement may compel providers of “electronic communications services” (think Google) to preserve “records and other evidence” (think email) for a period of time. These preservation demands do not require any degree of suspicion, let alone probable cause, and are sent without judicial approval. Here’s a sample, provided by the Department of Justice:

Because the statute allows law enforcement to bypass judicial review, “f” letters are an increasingly popular avenue for obtaining digitally stored, incriminating evidence.

Google, for instance, has annually received tens of thousands of “f” letters since July 2014. In the first half of 2018, Google received nearly 10,000 such preservation demands affecting over 24,000 users/accounts. (By comparison, during that time, Google received 8,687 search warrants and 11,099 subpoenas). In the second half of 2018, Facebook received 57,000 preservation demands affecting 96,000 users/accounts.

The use of “f” letter is becoming increasingly common. In its latest Transparency Report, Google published a graph depicting this increase. (The brown indicates preservation letters, the red are subpoenas and the gold, search warrants.)

Similar graphics provided in Facebook’s transparency report tell the same story.

Back to Basey. In Basey, law enforcement sent an “f” letter to Yahoo!, requiring that Yahoo! copy and preserve data from Basey’s account. Yahoo! complied (as it must under the statute). About 9 months after the “f” letter, the FBI returned with a search warrant and uncovered incriminating evidence. After being convicted at trial, Basey appealed, arguing that the government’s section 2703(f) preservation request violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The ACLU filed an amicus brief supporting Basey, and, at oral argument, the ACLU argued first.

The ACLU’s argument went something like this: When Yahoo!, acting as law enforcement’s agent, copied and preserved Basey’s electronic communications, they “seized” his property. Per the ACLU’s amicus brief:

Yahoo!’s compliance meant that Basey could no longer exclude the government from accessing, searching, using, or sharing his private messages and associated data. It meant that he could no longer delete his messages. Because of the receipt of the 2703(f) letter, whatever the user did to his information, a copy would nevertheless remain for government use. That copying and preservation meaningfully interfered with his possessory interests—and thus constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure

This argument apparently comes from Professor Orin Kerr. In a 2016 article, Kerr lays out the argument and its weaknesses, and concludes that “it’s a significant argument that defense lawyers should be making.” (Though, he cautions: “Perhaps I’m more of a fan of the argument because I came up with it; originating credit can blur vision.”)

Based on Monday’s oral argument, however, it appears that the practice of sending “f” letters will continue to go unreviewed. Basey moved to suppress the data obtained from Yahoo! after the court-imposed deadline. As a result, the district court declined to hear the motion. And the district court’s decision is reviewed for abuse of discretion.

Most questions from the three-judge panel went to procedural obstacles—and not the merits of the constitutional argument. In addition to Basey’s untimely filing, because the district court did not hear the motion, the record is lacking as to whether Yahoo! actually did copy Basey’s emails in response to the FBI’s demand, or whether Yahoo! preserves such data as a matter of course. So, the practice of “f” letters may continue to go unreviewed by federal appellate courts.

Firm Highlights

Publication

Uber’s Former Chief Security Officer Found Guilty of Obstruction For Coverup of Data Breaches

On October 5, 2022, after a monthlong jury trial, former Uber Chief Information Security Officer Joseph Sullivan was found guilty of obstructing proceedings of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and misprision of a felony...

Read More
Publication

A Primer for Corporate Directors: Maximizing Internal Investigation Effectiveness and Efficiency

In corporate America and across the globe, allegations of wrongdoing within companies are increasingly common, and the high cost of internal investigations continues apace.  In 2021, in an anonymous survey of more than 1,330...

Read More
Publication

Maximizing Internal Investigation Effectiveness & Efficiency

In corporate America and across the globe, allegations of wrongdoing within companies are increasingly common, and the high cost of internal investigations continues apace. Companies are now also routinely investigating allegations beyond violations of...

Read More
News

Sarah Good Appointed to California State Bar Board of Trustees

Read More
Publication

Nonprofit Basics: Document Retention Policies and Subpoenas, and a Conversation With Aviva Gilbert on Why Good Policies Matter

Welcome to EO Radio Show – Your Nonprofit Legal Resource . This Nonprofit Basics episode covers record retention policies, document destruction schedules, and why they matter. You may have noticed that the IRS Form...

Read More
Publication

The Humility To Prepare and the Confidence To Pull It off With Doug Young

Mike Herring interviews past ACTL President Doug Young in this episode of  Trial Tested: A Podcast by the American College of Trial Lawyers . S3E6: The Humility To Prepare and the Confidence To Pull It off With...

Read More
Publication

Internal Investigations for Nonprofits: A Means of Identifying and Addressing Misconduct Before the Regulators Come Calling

The worst nightmare for most nonprofit board members is a complaint that sparks an investigation of misconduct at the organization. The ember may have been burning for some time before the board becomes aware...

Read More
News

Farella Names Carolina de Armas and Hilary Krase As Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Pathfinders

Carolina de Armas and Hilary Krase
Read More
Publication

Cybersecurity Regulation: Key Takeaways From an Unusual FTC Order That Will Follow CEO for a Decade

The FTC recently issued a proposed order that would settle an enforcement action against Drizly, LLC and its co-founder and CEO, James Rellas, arising from data breaches in 2018 and 2020 that affected over...

Read More
News

Aviva Gilbert Named a Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Fellow

Aviva Gilbert Headshot at Farella Braun + Martel
Read More