The librarians, she wrote, had suffered "irreparable harm" to their First Amendment rights. While their case was being tried, the Congress was debating renewal of the Patriot Act, which had drastically lowered the standards for use of national security letters. As national security letter targets, the Connecticut librarians had a First Amendment right to relate their experience to lawmakers. The previous Attorney General, John Ashcroft, had caricatured librarians who voiced their concerns about the Patriot Act as "hysterics" and insisted the act wouldn't be used to pursue library records. While the renewal of the act was being debated in the fall of 2005 and early 2006, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was sending his U.S. Attorneys out on tour to promote the Patriot Act. (On one occasion the Connecticut League of Women Voters invited Connecticut U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor to defend the act in a public debate with Peter Chase, who was unable to attend and speak because he had been gagged—by U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor.)

STATE SECRETS—In the end, Judge Hall's ruling was struck down. The government filed for an immediate stay and appealed the ruling to the Second Circuit in New York. The librarians were permitted to attend their hearing at the Court of Appeals in New York because there were several courtrooms in the building and a large crowd was expected. They could not, however, identify themselves in any way, walk into the room together, sit together, greet one another, or greet or make eye contact with their lawyers.

"We were still a national security threat," Chase said. "There were librarians from Connecticut all over the courtroom, and every one of them knew I was John Doe."

The cat, in fact, was out of the bag—the identities of the two John Doe plaintiffs known because of publication in the New York Times. Even if the government's lawyers insisted that the line "the cat is out of the bag" be redacted from the motions filed by the ACLU lawyers. Even if the appellate court judges sustained the government's motions to redact complete pages of the Times articles that the ACLU attorneys had submitted to prove the cat was out of the bag.

Yet the three-judge panel on the Court of Appeals ruled that the gag order would remain in place. And the identities of the Connecticut librarians would remain secret—except, perhaps, to anyone who might have read the New York Times or a half-dozen other news outlets. The ACLU fired off an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg refused to lift the gag order.

Then the FBI folded, lifting the gag order and dropping the demand for the Library Connection's records. "Their timing was sinister," said Chase. Shortly after President Bush signed the renewed Patriot Act, the John Does of Connecticut were free to call their senators and representatives.

"They also took away our standing," Chase said. There was nothing to contest.

Anne Beeson said that's correct, but only in a purely technical sense. They could have continued the fight. But John Doe New York is providing a better vehicle. He's still in court awaiting a decision on his case. His hearing in New York should be scheduled for sometime before this July.

UNGAGGED AT LAST—Why is this scandal bigger than Al Gonzales? In March the Inspector General at the Justice Department released a report that documents widespread abuse of national security letters by FBI agents, who no longer need approval from Washington to issue them. Between 2003 and 2005 more than 140,000 national security letters were issued to "American persons"—many of the letters being in violation even of the standards that were lowered by the Patriot Act. Americans are unaware when their e-mail or their telephone conversations with their children doing a junior year in Spain are monitored by the National Security Agency. Yet more than 140,000 Americans know they have been handed national security letters by the FBI and told to keep their mouths shut about it.

Congress is paying attention. Senators Patrick Leahy and Russ Feingold have held hearings on national security letters—in the Senate Judiciary Committee, which Leahy chairs, and the Judiciary subcommittee that Feingold chairs. House Judiciary Chair John Conyers and Intelligence Committee Chair Sylvester Reyes are holding similar hearings on the House side. Ungagged, George Christian testified before Senator Feingold's committee on April 11.