The USA PATRIOT Act: (cont.
page 2)
What's So Patriotic About Trampling on the Bill of Rights?
Viewing Page:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Endnotes
II. SUSPENSION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES
The Administration's blatant power grab, coupled with the wide array of anti-terrorism
tools that the USA PATRIOT Act puts at its disposal, portends a wholesale suspension
of civil liberties that will reach far beyond those who are involved in terrorist
activities. First, the Act places our First Amendment rights to freedom of speech
and political association in jeopardy by creating a broad new crime of "domestic
terrorism," and by denying entry to non-citizens on the basis of ideology.
Second, the Act will reduce our already lowered expectations of privacy under
the Fourth Amendment by granting the government enhanced surveillance powers.
Third, non-citizens will see a further erosion of their due process rights as
they are placed in mandatory detention and removed from the United States under
the Act. Political activists who are critical of our government or who maintain
ties with international political movements, in addition to immigrants, are likely
to bear the brunt of these attacks on our civil liberties.
A. Silencing Political Dissent
Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act creates a federal crime of "domestic
terrorism" that broadly extends to "acts dangerous to human life that
are a violation of the criminal laws" if they "appear to be intended…to
influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," and if
they "occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States."10
Because this crime is couched in such vague and expansive terms, it may well be
read by federal law enforcement agencies as licensing the investigation and surveillance
of political activists and organizations based on their opposition to government
policies. It also may be read by prosecutors as licensing the criminalization
of legitimate political dissent. Vigorous protest activities, by their very nature,
could be construed as acts that "appear to be intended…to influence
the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion." Further, clashes
between demonstrators and police officers and acts of civil disobedience-even
those that do not result in injuries and are entirely non-violent-could be construed
as "dangerous to human life" and in "violation of the criminal
laws." Environmental activists, anti-globalization activists, and anti-abortion
activists who use direct action to further their political agendas are particularly
vulnerable to prosecution as "domestic terrorists."
In addition, political activists and the organizations with which they associate
may unwittingly find themselves the subject of unwanted government attention in
the form of surveillance and other intelligence-gathering operations. The manner
in which the government implements the Act must be carefully monitored to ascertain
whether activists and organizations are being targeted selectively for surveillance
and prosecution based on their opposition to government policies. The First Amendment
does not tolerate viewpoint-based discrimination.11
Furthermore, Section 411 of the Act poses an ideological test for entry into
the United States that takes into consideration core political speech. Representatives
of a political or social group "whose public endorsement of acts of terrorist
activity the Secretary of State has determined undermines United States efforts
to reduce or eliminate terrorist activities" can no longer gain entry into
the United States.12 Entry is also barred to non-citizens who have used their "position
of prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity,"
if the Secretary of State determines that their speech "undermines United
States efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist activities."13
B. Tolling the Death-Knell on Privacy
The USA PATRIOT Act14 launches a three-pronged assault on our privacy. First,
the Act grants the executive branch unprecedented, and largely unchecked, surveillance
powers, including the enhanced ability to track email and Internet usage, conduct
sneak-and-peek searches, obtain sensitive personal records, monitor financial
transactions, and conduct nationwide roving wiretaps. Second, the Act permits
law enforcement agencies to circumvent the Fourth Amendment's requirement of probable
cause when conducting wiretaps and searches that have, as "a significant
purpose," the gathering of foreign intelligence. Third, the Act allows for
the sharing of information between criminal and intelligence operations and thereby
opens the door to a resurgence of domestic spying by the Central Intelligence
Agency.
1. Enhanced Surveillance Powers
By and large, Congress granted the Administration its longstanding wish list
of enhanced surveillance tools, coupled with the ability to use these tools with
only minimal judicial and Congressional oversight. In its rush to pass an anti-terrorism
bill, Congress failed to exact in exchange a showing that these highly intrusive
new tools are actually needed to combat terrorism and that the Administration
can be trusted not to abuse them.
The recent decision in Kyllo v. United States15 serves as a pointed reminder
that once a Fourth Amendment protection has been eroded, the resulting loss to
our privacy is likely to be permanent. In Kyllo, the Supreme Court concluded that
the use of an advanced thermal detection device that allowed the police to detect
heat emanating from marijuana plants growing inside the defendant's home constituted
a "search" for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment and was presumptively
unreasonable without a warrant. The Court placed great weight on the fact that
the device was new, "not in general public use," and had been used to
"explore details of a private home that would previously have been unknowable
without physical intrusion."16 Implicit in the Court's holding is the principle
that once a technology is in general public use and its capabilities are known,
a reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment may no longer attach.
Several of the Act's enhanced surveillance tools, and the civil liberties concerns they raise, are examined below.
(Page 2)
Viewing Page:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Endnotes
CCR Files Suit for INS Detainees |
Lawsuit Against Royal Dutch/Shell to go Forward |
Military Trinunals
September 11th |
Low Power Radio |
Victory Against Human Rights Violators
The USA Patriot Act |
Toward A More Perfect Democracy |
A Blow Against Racial Profiling
