Would Releasing the Martin Luther King Files Help Curb the Surveillance State?
The FBI waged a psychological war against King through its COINTELPRO program, a counterintelligence operation targeting civil rights leaders suspected of communist ties. With backing from FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and approval from Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, agents illegally wiretapped King's home, offices, and hotel rooms. What started as a probe into alleged communist ties morphed into a protracted campaign to destroy King's reputation, utilizing fabricated stories, false documents, and anonymous threats.
The recordings and accounts of King's private life, deemed likely illegal and unethical by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1979, were sealed for 50 years by a federal court in 1977, following a lawsuit by King's associate and the SCLC.
A January executive order issued by President Donald Trump directs the Justice Department to seek an early release of the records, although officials claim their focus is only on documents related to King's assassination. On June 4, Judge Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia agreed to review the files before determining what will be released. "It's not going to happen overnight," Leon said. "The court is going to move very carefully."
King's youngest daughter, Bernice, and son, Martin Luther King III, have asked the court not to release the documents, arguing that it would infringe on the family's privacy. The Kings also cite the botched release of John F. Kennedy files that revealed Social Security numbers, and point to the FBI's attempts to blackmail and smear King as evidence that a premature, unvetted disclosure could be harmful.
Matthew Guariglia, senior policy analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, tells Reason that the issue of privacy can be easily rectified. "The FBI or whoever is releasing these files has an opportunity to both preserve the privacy of the surveillance target and also reveal any historically significant facts about FBI methodology just by redacting a lot of the intentionally embarrassing surveillance information," he said.
Leon will be tasked with balancing the file's significance in American history against the privacy concerns of those who were illegally spied on. As Guariglia notes, the situation requires a nuanced approach: "Important historical documents should not be withheld and classified forever. That being said, I think motivation here is important."
While the King family's concerns are valid, the primary issue remains that the government collected such material in the first place. The Kings' objections are "shortsighted," Patrick Eddington, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, tells Reason. "In an age where government surveillance and political repression has become all too commonplace, I think the release of these records showing the FBI's prurient surveillance of King and attempts to blackmail him into abandoning the civil rights cause would be a powerful reminder to Americans about why the FBI's domestic surveillance activities need to be sharply curtailed."
The FBI's surveillance of Americans continues to this day, largely with the approval of policymakers. Despite multiple instances of illegal FBI surveillance, including monitoring protesters after the 2020 George Floyd riots and the January 6 Capitol riot, Congress extended Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 2024. This post-9/11 authority allows warrantless surveillance of foreigners abroad and the "incidental" collection of Americans' data.
While the explicit targeting of Americans is prohibited, the 2024 renewal endorses nearly all warrantless searches of Section 702 data, inevitably capturing Americans' private conversations in the process.
Unsealing the FBI's surveillance records on Dr. King would not violate his legacy—it would reaffirm the values he died fighting for: truth, accountability, and freedom from state repression. The release would be especially worthwhile if it leads to meaningful curbs on federal surveillance powers.
The post Would Releasing the Martin Luther King Files Help Curb the Surveillance State? appeared first on Reason.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
12 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Thailand and Cambodia reach Trump trade deals, US official says
Thailand and Cambodia were both facing a potential tariff rate of 36% on their goods to the United States, which is one of the largest export markets for both countries. They have been rushing to avert the steep tariffs before a deadline Friday, especially after neighboring Indonesia and the Philippines secured rates of 19% and Vietnam 20%. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The senior Cambodian official involved in the negotiations said Cambodia would be pleased if the rate was 15%. The official said that Prime Minister Hun Manet had asked Trump for 'a good tariff so we can rebuild our economy because Cambodia had been at war for decades and only obtained peace in 1998.' Advertisement Trump 'acknowledged and understood,' said the official, citing information from Hun Manet. As part of the deal, Cambodia has offered to improve market access to American goods and buy 10 Boeing planes, with the option to buy 10 more, according to the official. Advertisement On Saturday, Trump said he told the leaders of Thailand and Cambodia that he would stop negotiating with them on trade if they did not agree to a ceasefire. After a truce was reached in Malaysia on Monday, Trump called the leaders of both countries and told his trade team to restart talks. Pichai said negotiators had proposed to the Trump administration 'conditions acceptable to Thailand, with the goal of protecting the country's best interests.' This article originally appeared in
Boston Globe
12 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Homeland Security has a revealing taste in art
Advertisement 'American Progress' portrays the expansion of the United States as part of a divine plan. Civilization and American power move steadily into new lands. Those who are displaced flee helplessly toward perdition. Many in Washington still see the world that way: weaker civilizations giving way to irresistible American power. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Although 'American Progress' was widely reprinted in the late 19th century, it will not be featured in any book about painterly brilliance. The artist, John Gast, was trained in lithography, not painting. He made this picture on order from a publisher who wanted an appealing image for books about the West. The result is arguably the most eloquent work of political art ever produced in the United States. It overflows with symbols and archetypes. Advertisement Dominating the picture is a robust blonde-haired angel wearing a flowing robe that evokes the glory of ancient Rome. In her hand she holds a book — a symbol of knowledge. She floats above groups of prospectors, farmers, and settlers as they trek resolutely westward. They seek to implant the American way of life in new lands. A telegraph wire flows from the angel's hands. Railroads steam below her. Modern technology is depicted as the engine of progress and Americans as the master of that technology. Most poignant in 'American Progress' are the Native Americans who retreat helplessly before this onslaught. The left-hand side of the picture, into which they are retreating, is dark and threatening, while a brilliant rising sun illuminates the advancing settlers. Native people and buffalo flee together. They represent the fading of races that were considered unable to adapt to American-style civilization. In 'American Progress,' the transition from pastoral Native American life to farming, ranching, and dynamic modernity is presented as peaceful. Former inhabitants of North America simply make way for the new arrivals. There is no hint of the brutality of 'Indian removal' campaigns, no suggestion that Native peoples resisted, and no reference to US Army units that were, at the moment this picture was painted, violently pushing them off their ancestral lands. The central idea behind this picture is America's inherent virtue. It is a powerful part of our national self-image. Most Americans, like people in most other large countries, have traditionally believed that extending our influence over others brings benefits to all. Contemplating 'collateral damage' muddies that picture. Nineteenth-century Americans did not want to hear about Indian massacres any more than their descendants have wanted to hear about massacres of Vietnamese, Afghans, or Gazans. Advertisement 'American Progress' became popular because it portrays us as we like to think we are. The Americans in this picture come not only without malice but with limitless promise. Behind them, in the already-civilized East, are symbols of their achievement, notably the Brooklyn Bridge. Ahead lie new lands that can be likewise transformed as soon as the The copper and steel work of art on the right is called "American Progress (after John Gast)." It was part of 'The Archaeology of Another Possible Future,' an installation by the artist Liz Glynn at MassMoCa in 2018. ourtesy of the artist and Paula Cooper Gallery, New York Many American leaders, now as in the past, view the world as a territory to be conquered, or at least to be brought within the sphere of American influence. Those who resist are like the Native Americans and the buffalo in 'American Progress' — relics of a past era that must yield to a new order. Intriguingly, the painter who created this rosy vision of American expansion was himself an immigrant. He was born in Berlin, the son of a lithographer. If he was like most European immigrants of that period, he was inspired by stories he had heard about the New World. His painting is a tribute to what Americans had achieved and were achieving. 'American Progress' shows American expansion as benign and conflict-free. It celebrates rugged individualism and offers no sympathy for what Trump would call 'losers.' That may be why the Department of Homeland Security has adopted it. Stephen Kinzer is a senior fellow at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University.
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Megyn Kelly Has No Sympathy for Trump on Epstein Mess
MAGA media star Megyn Kelly had some harsh words for President Donald Trump's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein crisis, saying it was 'hard to have a lot of sympathy' for the administration after a series of unforced errors. The issue has dominated the news for weeks after the Department of Justice and the FBI issued a memo earlier this month concluding that the financier, who died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, did not have a 'client list' and was not murdered—as many of the MAGA faithful believe—but killed himself. Instead of putting the controversy to rest, the announcement sparked anger and accusations of a cover-up among even some of Trump's most ardent supporters. That response was completely predictable, Kelly said on Monday's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, making it 'hard to have a lot of sympathy' for the administration. 'Now the president's very annoyed that it won't go away. It won't go away because of the way he's handled it,' she said. She listed a series of missteps on the part of the administration, including Attorney General Pam Bondi's decision to issue the memo in the middle of a slow news summer without holding a press conference to answer questions about the findings. That decision was particularly misguided considering Trump's picks to lead the FBI—Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino—had previously 'fanned this flame' and pushed the theory that Epstein was murdered to protect his powerful associates. 'Whoever told the Justice Department that this could somehow be buried and that people would move on and that the Trump administration could get away with that ridiculous two-page summation of 'You're not getting any more information because there's no there there' should be fired,' she said. 'That person is an idiot and didn't understand the Republican base—certainly the core MAGA base.' Instead of getting out ahead of the scandal, the administration has been trying to play catch-up by seeking the grand jury transcripts from Epstein's criminal proceedings—despite knowing the court was not likely to release them—and by speaking to Epstein's accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. Maxwell, however, is not a reliable source considering she's currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for luring and grooming and Epstein's victims, Kelly said. 'Can we really trust anything this woman says when she it's either this—give something up or someone up—or spend 20 years in jail?' Kelly said. Kelly said she agreed 'completely' with Morgan's assessment of the administration's handling of the scandal, which he described as 'leading everybody up to the water's edge, and then not giving anyone a drink.' 'This is self-inflicted,' she said. Trump and Epstein were friends for years until they had a falling out not over Epstein's sexual impropriety but because he 'stole' Trump's hired help, the president said Monday.
