Abstract This paper discusses the Libertarian Party and its negative view of the PatriotAct. The paper reviews Libertarianism's intellectual underpinnings, the Libertarian party position, as well as the recent history including judicial decisions of the USA PatriotAct and considers the views of the Lyndon LaRouche, the leader of the Libertarian Party.
From the Paper "There is little doubt that the Patriot Act has stirred a great deal of debate in recent years. The following paper will briefly outline the libertarian view of the Patriot Act by first discussing what the libertarian political ideology and what the position of the party is vis-?vis the Act. The paper will also look at the history of the Act (specifically focusing on some key federal court rulings about it) and examine some current Federal Court cases which center upon the Act's provisions. The paper will also detail some controversies surrounding the Patriot Act and will cite some of the chief actors within libertarian party ranks who have spoken out on the subject of the Patriot Act. The paper will also identify the committees in the House and Senate who hold hearings on the Act and what appears likely to..."
Abstract The paper argues that the US PatriotAct violates many of the basic human rights of individuals and makes Americans less secure than ever before. The paper illustrates its point with many examples that show how the PatriotAct has resulted in violations against the civil rights of U.S. citizens and against the Constitution. The paper concludes that while the USA PatriotAct increases security in some areas, it has greatly reduced the security of Americans in many other areas of their lives.
Outline:
Introduction
Statement of Thesis
The Argument
Troubling Provisions of the USA PatriotAct Civil Rights Violations
Summary and Conclusion
From the Paper "Following the events of September 11, 2001, legislation has occurred which has ludicrously removed the rights of citizens instead of serving to bolster and support citizen's rights in the United States. Furthermore, while the leaders of the United States are speaking of 'safety and security' the reality is that at no other time in history has the rights, safety and security of American citizens been so greatly compromised. The USA Patriot Act was passed in its first form in the "Uniting and Strengthening American by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism' act six weeks after the events of September 11, 2001." (Wronkiewicz, 2002, p. 1) One result of this is related in the work of Wronkiewicz who states that resulting from the USA Patriot Act is what is termed a "tense position" for the library community in its role as "guardians of intellectual freedom." (2002, p. 2) "
An analysis of the PatriotAct, which was passed in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and gives sweeping powers of search and surveillance to the law enforcing agencies.
Abstract This paper discusses the controversy that still surrounds the PatriotAct and examines its impact on the law enforcement agencies and the Fourth Amendment. The USA PatriotAct, which was signed as law in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, gives sweeping powers of search and surveillance to the law enforcing agencies and is aimed at eliminating the terrorist activities in the U.S. The Department of Justice and the Bush administration claim that the PatriotAct has been instrumental in preventing further terrorist attacks in the U.S. after 9/11. However, the civil libertarians claim that the Act severely compromises the civil liberties granted in the U.S. Constitution and violates the due process law of the Fourth Amendment.
From the Paper "The Bush administration and the US Department of Justice insist that the Patriot Act is not aimed at restricting civil liberties and consists of only modest, incremental changes in the law in order to preserve the lives and liberty of the American people from the challenges posed by a global terrorist network. The Department of Justice Website claims that following its passage, the Patriot Act has played a key part in a number of successful operations to protect innocent Americans from the deadly plans of terrorists. (The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving Life and Liberty, 2003) Others such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) beg to disagree and denounce the defense of the Act by the government as misleading and dishonest. Their main worry is that the expansion of police powers and the reduction of personal privacy do not make Americans any safer from terrorists - it only allows the government to interfere with the privacy of its citizens."
Abstract The U.S.A. PatriotAct was passed in a hurry by the House of Representatives and the Senate in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The act was immediately attacked by the civil libertarians as unnecessary and a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Administration and the Justice Department defend the law vehemently, considering it necessary for security reasons. This paper focuses on the criticism of the PatriotAct and the problems faced in its application. It also reviews the current public opinion about the act.
From the Paper "Although the Justice Department claims that the PATRIOT Act has been largely responsible for the prevention of further terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11 (see the official website of the Justice Department), the application of the Act has made the US more of a "police state" than ever before. Provisions in the Patriot Act such as Sections 411 and 412 that allow detention and deportation of aliens without court rulings or judicial review mean that immigrants are now living in a general state of fear. They way over-zealous law enforcement officers apply the Act on immigrants remains largely uncovered by the main-stream press. Shocking stories of such abuse, however, filter out sometimes. For example, a vivid eye-witness account of a PATRIOT-authorized police raid on an Indian restaurant appears in the Alternet. (Halperin, 2003)."
Abstract The paper discusses how the PatriotAct received overwhelming endorsement even though it greatly weakened civil liberties provided by the U.S. Constitution. The paper explores the positions of opponents and supporters of this act. The paper presents a personal opinion that while there are certainly some long-needed changes brought about by the PatriotAct, it went too far in weakening civil liberties and invading the individual's right to privacy.
Outline:
Issue
Pros
Cons
My Position
From the Paper "The USA Patriot Act, commonly referred to as the Patriot Act, was signed into law on October 26, 2001 just 45 days after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City (USA Patriot Act). The Act expanded the authority of U.S. law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute terrorism (USA Patriot Act). Many of the act's provisions were set to sunset on December 31, 2005 (USA Patriot Act). Given the horrific shock and fear following September 11th, the need for an immediate reponse to terrorism and perhaps the feeling that the Act could be fixed a short-time later because of the sunset clause, the Patriot Act received overwhelming endorsement even though it greatly weakened civil liberties provided by the U.S. Constitution."
Tags: terrorism, civil, liberties, Constitution, privacy, rights
Abstract This paper provides an overview of the PatriotAct and the main goals of this new law. It then examines the law from the perspective of different amendments in the Constitution and determines that the Act is a violation of civil rights.
From the Paper "Now that we have gained some clear understanding of the various ways in which USA Patriotic ACT violates our rights granted by Fourth, First and Fifth Amendment, it has become obvious why this law must be rejected for its unconstitutional approach to the issue of terrorism and national security. American public need not relinquish their rights to free expression and protection against unwarranted searches on the pretext of greater national good. The previous laws such as Title III and FISA had given the government enough latitude to conduct necessary surveillance without hurting the rights of citizens and non-citizens. These laws could have been increased in scope instead of altering them to meet the surveillance needs and requirements of law enforcement agencies. American public is being asked to compromise a little too much in the name of national security and they are being expected to give up many important rights simply because these rights allegedly add to terrorist threats. The USA Patriot Act clearly violates many previous laws and it is important to understand the strengths of the latter to see the weaknesses of the former."
Tags: terror, 9-11, amendment, constitution, civil, rights
Abstract To identify what effect the U.S.A. PatriotAct has had on the war against terrorism, in general, and on the flow of funds to such groups, in particular, this paper provides a review and analysis of the relevant literature, followed by a summary of the research in the conclusion.
Review and Discussion
Current Law
The USA PATRIOTAct: ?It Could Have Been Worse.?
Offshore Banking and Money Laundering.
Legal Analysis
From the Paper "As a result of the Act, law enforcement officials who are investigating suspected terrorist activities now have sweeping authority to obtain customer records from Internet service providers and to demand transaction records from other businesses. According to Jane Kirtley, Newhouse News Service reported in April that ISPs and other telecommunications businesses such as cell phone operators have received hundreds of thousands of subpoenas for customer data, including subscriber lists, session times and the methods and sources of payment. The Associated Press Online reported on June 27, 2003 that demands for information by government officials have soared as much as five times over pre-September 11 levels. The Act is designed to "deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world" and to "enhance law enforcement investigatory tools ....""
Abstract This paper examines the PatriotAct and explains that its objectives include provisions for providing the U.S. with the instruments necessary to combat and prevent future acts of terrorism. The paper argues that the Act, however, is limited on many levels and does not necessarily achieve the objective of preventing terrorism; rather, it imposes limitations on civil liberties and causes unnecessary fears to be raised in the minds and hearts of the American people.
From the Paper "Certain constraints evident in achieving the goals of the Act are presented by clientele opinion, the courts, agency staff, federal rules and even the culture within the U.S. Many argue that provisions in the Patriot Act are not compatible with the U.S. culture, which supports the idea that the government should be charged with "defending life, liberty, and property against both domestic and foreign predators" (Levy, 2003). Though in theory, the act was established to support these causes, many would argue that it in effect denies certain civil liberties and causes immigrants and non-citizens to carelessly be classified as foreign predators in many situations (Levy, 2003)."
Abstract This paper examines the U.S. PatriotAct, which was passed in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The paper discusses exactly what the implications are in the implementation of this act should another terrorist event such as 9/11 occur. The paper contends that, while the onset of the act was to protect America from terrorist attacks, among other safeguards, the aftermath of the enactment has presented a myriad of controversies. These controversies are outlined in the paper.
From the Paper "Restrictive laws have been passed at crucial times in the history of the United States before the passing of the USA Patriot Act. Although the laws within this Act are intrusive upon the privacy of United States Citizens, there are those who do not mind the restrictiveness of the Act in exchange for safety. This is understandable to a certain extent however one must keep in mind that the Constitutional rights vested in each individual in the United States has been tread upon to a great extent by the USA Patriot Act."
Abstract This is written in policy memo style; hence, it omits the words "to be" "is" "are", etc., making it sound extremely professional. It examines the PatriotAct, criticizes its motives, presents its consequences, and proposes alternatives and recommendations.
From the Paper "On September 11, 2001, America's population started its day with immense terror and confusion. As Americans that hold individual freedom upon a pedestal, the Bush Administration went to work drafting the USA PATRIOT Act within 45 days of the attacks attempting to fight terror and retain America's Constitutional freedoms."
Abstract The paper gives a brief description of terrorism and explains the reason why the USA Patriat Act was enacted. The paper first explains that the Act was enacted with the purpose to deter and punish terrorist acts. The paper then presents a comprehensive legal analysis of the Act, analyzing each aspect in detail, in order to shed some light on its various related pros and cons. In addition, the paper notes that the Act addresses the issue of money laundering, defines crimes, and strengthens the USA's northern border with Canada in order to help prevent the entry of aliens and terrorists.
From the Paper "The Act also addresses the issue of money laundering by defining it as the 'flow of cash or other valuables derived from or intended to facilitate the commission of a criminal offense. Such money laundering activities can now be curbed by the federal authorities by regulations, criminal sanctions and forfeiture. The authority of the Secretary of Treasury stands expanded by the Patriot Act in his ability to regulate the activities of US financial institutions as well as their relations with foreign individuals and entities. Under the Act, securities brokers, dealers and commodity merchants, advisors and pool operators are required to file suspicious activity reports (SARs) as well as reports involving cash transactions above $ 10,000. It prevents US financial institutions from maintaining correspondent accounts for foreign shell banks and preventing their customers to conceal their financial activities by using institutional concentration account practices. Customer identification standards stand upgraded as a result of the Act with special provisions for identification of all foreign clients. It is also required of the financial institutions within the US to develop accounting audit procedures and controls, and provide additional staff for these activities in order to monitor the financial transactions effectively and in a more transparent manner (Doyle, 20028)."
Tags: Terrorism, US PatriotAct of 2001, Federal- State coordination, FISA
Abstract This paper explains the reasons why the U.S.A. PatriotAct is so controversial. The paper points out that the Act increases surveillance and investigative powers without instigating a system of checks and balances to safeguard civil liberties. Also discussed is the controversy surrounding the haste with which the Act was passed. Furthermore, this paper explains the implications that the lack of protection for civil liberties and the hasty response to 9/11 have for American citizens.
From the Paper "The September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States had severe and immediate consequences. One of the most far-reaching of these is probably the ease with which terrorists were able to plan and carry out the attacks. This brought the government's attention certain shortcomings in the security measures in place at the time. The USA PATRIOT Act is one of the controversial results of the government's panicky response to the 9/11 attacks. It might be seen as an unobjective and emotional response to a time of crisis. Indeed, the increasing negative responses to the Act appears to substantiate the notion that the Act was passed in haste, without the opportunity for sufficient debate and in-depth thought."
Abstract The paper reviews the reasons behind the PatriotAct's formulation and passage into law in order to explain why millions of Americans were willing to cast the Constitution aside in the name of national security. The paper explores the critical responses to this Act and the Constitutionalchallenges it presents. The paper strongly contends that
Constitutionalchallenges to the PatriotAct should be intensively pursued and asserts that this Act is a travesty of democracy. A large amount of source material is appended to the paper.
Outline:
Introduction
Background and History of USA PatriotAct Origination
Critical Responses to PatriotAct Content and Implications of PatriotAct Reasons for ConstitutionalChallenge Content of 8 USC 1182
Amendment Issues
Case Law Discussion
Implications of Future Terrorist Attacks
Recommendations
Conclusion
From the Paper "In stating the problems presented by the USA Patriot Act and in examining its background, it is necessary to review the reasons for its formulation and passage into law, for they explain why millions of Americans have been willing to cast the Constitution aside in the name of national security. This Act emerged into the national consciousness just eight days after the al-Qaeda terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, when the Bush Administration made a legislative proposal that has become known as the USA Patriot Act. (Balkin)"
"Critics contend that the proposal was not the product of a carefully considered examination of the failures and deficiencies of the American law enforcement and intelligence agencies that allowed the attacks to succeed, but was little more than a collection of questionable old conservative agendas that were taken off the shelf and introduced by the Bush Administration in the form of vital new powers the federal government needed to protect the United States from terrorism. (Brunswick)"
Abstract In this article, the writer notes that the U.S. PatriotAct was passed in haste following the terrorist attacks on the U.S. in 2001. The writer points out that the act was reauthorized and amended in 2006. The writer claims that in its urgency, the United States Congress, fueled by extremely fearful times and the mushrooming nationalism spawned by those fears, appears to have launched its own attack on the United States Constitution in order to provide the legal clout needed to avoid another attack. This paper reviews the literature surrounding the PatriotAct's intrusion into the Constitution. The writer provides a review of the issues and the amendments and looks at how the PatriotAct conflicts with those amendments.
Outline:
Introduction
Bill of Rights, Amendment IV
Background on Fourth Amendment
Generalizations
The PatriotAct Specifics and Generalizations
Senator Russell Feingold: The only U.S. Senator to Vote against the PatriotAct in 2001
Sixth Amendment
Generalizations about the PatriotAct, the Loss of Privacy, the Digital Technology Implications and the Fourth Amendment
Librarians Concerns about the PatriotAct
From the Paper "A recent research piece in the Brigham Young University Law Review asserts that, to begin with, there are problems for 21st Century individuals involved in justice and law enforcement. Quite apart from Patriot Act considerations, the Fourth Amendment is tricky. That is because, Minert writes, the language in the Fourth Amendment "is inherently ambiguous." Indeed the Amendment forbids "unreasonable searches and seizures" and it certainly does not outline parameters for how a proper search warrant should be given to law enforcement by courts."
Abstract This paper discusses the legal issues associated with the USA PatriotAct of 2001. The paper provides a background and history to the Act and how it has been used by federal law enforcement authorities, specifically in ways that have absolutely nothing to do with terrorism or homeland security. The paper focuses on the potential for the PatriotAct to erode constitutional rights.
Table of Contents:
Introduction - Background and History
Major Legal Issues
The PatriotAct in Use
Conclusion
From the Paper "The problem is many of the provisions of the Patriot Act were actually drafted long before September 11, 2001, and had previously been rejected by Congress precisely because they violated established principles of constitutional law defining the limits of governmental surveillance of citizens for the purpose of law enforcement and prosecution. For example, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other components of the Department of Justice (DOJ) had previously sought certain types of "roving" wire taps in criminal investigations which were denied because they were considered too broad to satisfy constitutional protections (ACLU 2008). The Patriot Act authorizes those taps on the basis that terrorists often move too often to permit a effective surveillance of any specific location or telephone carrier."
