Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism is the extended terminology that refers to the U.S.A. Patriot Act which, following the events of 9/11 was passed by the Senate immediately and almost unanimously. When the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were attacked in 2001, concerns over national security and America's susceptibility to terrorist threats emerged more so as the country remained baffled at what had just happened. Governmental figures needed to address people's concerns and overall, the issue of law enforcement being able to prevent such attacks from ever happening again. With Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh having authored the act shortly after the events and upon reviewing existing practices and methodologies, Jim Sensenbrenner, member of the Republican Party, presented it to Congress. It should be noted that, generally, the Patriot Act is embedded in America's history of electronic surveillance that emerged along with improved technologies. Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 permitted wiretapping under certain regulatory conditions. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 was meant to ?update and clarify Federal privacy protections and standards in light of dramatic changes in new computer and telecommunications technologies. (as cited in Roundy, 2006, p. 413) Furthermore, the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) was passed to ?preserve the government's ability…to intercept communications involving advanced technologies while protecting the privacy of communications and without impending the introduction of new technologies. (as cited in Henderson, 2002, p. 184) While these acts concerned surveillance in relation to criminal issues, national security was particularly addressed in terms of electronic surveillance by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. However,...
While the former was passed immediately, the second version was delayed to be drafted in compatibility with the Senate's. Eventually, the final edited version was sent to the President and was signed into law on October 26, 2001. Within the next following years, expressed opinions increased as to the violation of privacy and unconstitutional premises as a result of modified legalities of electronic surveillance. In 2005, certain provisions of the Act expired and reauthorization was needed to reinstate the document and permit enforcement of provisions. However, Democrats had started to oppose the Act by 2005 and proceeded with delaying the process. A year later nevertheless, the Patriot Act was granted full support and was authorized with only three provisions being subject to expiring while most provisions were made permanent. Certain civil liberties assurances were introduced with the reauthorization in 2006.
While sections in the Patriot Act have neither been criticized nor ostracized, some are controversial. The most debatable of sections do appear to be the three expiring provisions that are now due in 2015. As such, section 206 acknowledges ?roving surveillance authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. (USA Patriot Act, 2001) This is to say that law agencies have the liberty to survey over non-specific targets, being persons or locations. Section 215 grants ?access to records and other items under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. (USA Patriot Act, 2001) Section implies that no reasoning or causal factors are required to allow surveillance in cases of terrorism investigation. Lastly, section 6001(a) of the Intelligence Reform and…
