Though out-and-out electronic monitoring of private information as evidence in a terrorist-related trial is highly unlikely, it nonetheless puts the average American citizen in a position where his or her privacy is greatly compromised (Soma, Nichols, Rynerson, Maish, and Rogers, 2005).
Another section that deems careful scrutiny is Section 215 of the Patriot Act. This section allows the FBI to demand production of any "tangible things" for terrorism investigations. Vagueness and ambiguity seem to be recurring themes throughout the Patriot Act. Section 215 is exceptionally vague in terms of "what is" and "is not" fair game to FBI acquisitions. It seems that the Patriot Act is written in such a way that "anything" could be conceived as being open in the eyes of investigators, including private and confidential handwritten information, tape recordings, hard drives, and CD-ROM -- simply because they are "tangible things" (USA Patriot Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005).
Interestingly enough, the nation's largest telephone carriers are not protected by the Patriot Act even though the Bush administration contracted them for their domestic spying program. Two separate congressional votes rejected the telephone company's request to be granted retroactive immunity. "Most significantly, the bill does not provide immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in the president's warrantless surveillance program. We cannot even consider providing immunity unless we know exactly what we are providing immunity from. And even then, we have to proceed with great caution..." (cited in eWeek, 2007). President Bush requested Congress to offer protection to all carriers that offered to hand over client telephone and e-mail records -- often without a warrant or subpoena -- to government officials. The White House commenced warrantless surveillance activity after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Verizon, at & T, and Qwest Communications International all argue that they thought they were protected under existing federal, state, and local laws. Oddly enough, these carriers are also under a federal court order to neither admit nor refute their involvement in the program. "The full Senate will yet need to resolve the immunity issue. While I appreciate the problems facing the telecommunications companies, the retroactive immunity issue to me is not about...
Patriot Act In response to the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, Congress passed the U.S.A. Patriot Act, an act that gives federal officials more authority to track and intercept communications, for both law enforcement and foreign intelligence gathering purposes (Doyle, 2002). The Patriot Act also gives the Secretary of the Treasury regulatory powers to prevent corruption of U.S. financial institutions for foreign money laundering purposes. The U.S.A. Patriot Act
Patriot Act The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act was passed soon after September 11. The groundbreaking legislation, which has caused tremendous controversy and outcry among civil rights activists, has become one of the most important pieces of legislation passed in Congress in recent American history. The U.S.A. Patriot Act contains previsions included in previous anti-terrorist bills, including one
Patriot Act: Advantages and Disadvantages Advantages Increases the Effectiveness of Law Enforcement Agencies The Patriot Act which was signed as law by President George W. Bush on October 27, 2001 reads like a wish list of the law enforcing agencies. It was long-standing complaint of the law enforcers that the provisions contained in the Bill of Rights such as the "due process" of the Fourth Amendment constrained them in their investigations of suspected
It is, in one sense, a give and take relationship, but underlying it are the philosophies of Rousseau and Smith, in spite of the fact that both are full of contradictions. Rousseau, for example, states that man's "first law is to provide for his own preservation, his first cares are those which he owes to himself; and, as soon as he reaches years of discretion, he is the sole
PATRIOT ACT V. FOURTH AMENDMENT Patriot Act & 4th Amendment The Fourth Amendment was created in 1791 primarily to end the existence of general warrants, which the American colonialists hated and feared. These warrants were used by the English government to conduct door-to-door searches and mass arrests, often as a coercive method for achieving social and political goals (Maclin and Mirabella, 2011, p. 1052). With this history in mind the text of
" Prohibiting "a bill of attainder" means that the U.S. Congress cannot pass a law that considers individual or aggregation blameworthy and later discipline them. Disallowing an ex post facto law implies that the U.S. Congress cannot make any given act a crime after the time the act had been committed. It is doubtful that this applies to a few sections of the Patriot Act. Individuals who monitor the Supreme
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now