TATTERED COVER RULING PRESERVES READERS' RIGHTS

Reading A Book, No Matter The Subject, Is Not A Crime

What you read is nobody's business, especially the government's.

That's the gist of the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling Monday that the
Tattered Covered bookstore in Denver does not have to turn over its sales
records to law enforcement officers in pursuit of the makers of illegal drugs.

The decision stated that the Colorado Constitution and the First Amendment
protect the right of people to purchase books -- and by extension explore
the ideas and opinions within them -- anonymously and without fear of
governmental monitoring or interference.

The ruling is a victory for the bookstore, but also for the First Amendment
and privacy. It proves that we do not have to sign away our right to be
left alone, even in these days of heightened security and worry about crime
and terror, just because a government agency thinks we might be up to
something.

It also proves that the arena of ideas is open and free. The government may
not monitor nor block the exchange of information nor the expression of
opinion in reading material.

In this case, the North Metro Drug Task Force wanted to see the Tattered
Cover's sales records in hopes of finding who bought a pair of books on how
to manufacture methamphetamine. An envelope from the popular store was
found at the site of a meth lab in Adams County, as were the books.

Police wanted to figure out who built the lab based on who bought the
books. With search warrant in hand, they went to the Tattered Cover,
assuming that's where the books came from.

But the Tattered Cover balked at opening its records to the police, knowing
that customers expect and deserve privacy when it comes to book purchases
and their choice of reading material. And so began a celebrated court test
that ended Monday with the court ruling in favor of the bookstore.

The drug task force had other sources of evidence to nail down who built
and used the lab, the court ruled. Searching for clues at the bookstore was
a reach, at least in this case.

But law enforcement was not entirely shut out in the decision. The court
left the door open for police agencies to seek access to bookstore sales
records if they can prove a compelling reason for getting those records.

A hearing would be required before a search warrant could be issued and law
enforcement would have to prove its case. The bookseller would have a voice
in the hearing. A process was established, and basic right preserved.

Americans may read books on any subject -- even something as reprehensible
as how to build a drug lab and make methamphetamine -- because that is
their right.

If someone chooses to follow through and build a drug lab and manufacture
meth, that's a problem. That is illegal, dangerous and stupid. That is
something about which law enforcement can do something.

That is criminal behavior. Reading a book about it is not.