Although these training materials and other documents were already in the public domain, DOJ asserted that they were not appropriate for external use. One of the listed documents is a public law and law offices commonly use the others in assisting clients to reclaim assets from the government.
After the public backlash, the Superintendent released a second message saying, "In response to the Government Printing Office's further inquiry into this matter, the Department of Justice has requested that I advise depository libraries to disregard the previous instructions to withdraw these publications." DOJ determined that documents already in the public domain were not of a sensitive enough nature to require removal. Neither letter provides a precise definition for the term "sensitive."
Given the atmosphere of secrecy at DOJ these actions alarmed information advocates. Last year, the General Accounting Office (GAO) released a report saying, a significant percentage of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) officers have reduced the amount of information available to the public because of Attorney General John Ashcroft's infamous October 2001 memo. However, removing documents from libraries is an even more forceful effort at secrecy then denying requests.
The five documents titles are:
- Civil and Criminal Forfeiture Procedure
- Select Criminal Forfeiture Forms
- Select Federal Asset Forfeiture Statutes
- Asset forfeiture and money laundering resource directory
- Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 (CAFRA), PL no.
106-185, 114 Stat. 202 (2000)