United States v. China Telecom, D.C. C., 1:20-mc-00116 (Dec. 20, 2022)

Electronic communication service provider that was recipient of an administrative subpoena, in the form of a National Security Letter (NSL), petitioned, under the National Security Letter Statute, to set aside NSL it had received from the FBI, which sought subscriber information and required recipient not to disclose that it had received such letter. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Susan Illston, J., 930 F.Supp.2d 1064, found that the nondisclosure provisions of the statute violated the First Amendment and separation of powers principles. That opinion was subsequently vacated based on extensive changes made to the statute, and on remand the District Court found the statute to be constitutional. Appeal was taken. Holding: 1) nondisclosure requirement was content based on its face; and 2) nondisclosure requirement did not, taken as a whole, violate free speech rights of recipients. Affirmed.