How the USA Patriot Act Effects Law Enforcement - Research Paper Example

How the USA Patriot Act Effect Law Enforcement Introduction Law enforcement is the corner stone for the economic, political, and social stability of any country. In the wake of increased terrorism attacks, United States has implemented the USA Patriot Act which will be the concern of this paper and the effect it has on law enforcement. However, prior to reviewing the effect that the United States of America Patriot Act has on the law enforcement, it is of paramount importance to understand what the Patriot Act entail. The Patriot Act was signed into law by on October 26th, 2001 by President Bush and was aimed at Strengthening and Uniting America by obscuring and intercepting terrorism, through the provision of appropriate tools (USA PATRIOT Act 107). This illustrates that the USA Patriot Act is aimed at enforcing the law enforcement agencies by enabling them to be in a position to competently deal with terrorism attempts. However, enormous debate has revolved as pertains to whether the USA Patriot Act positively or negatively effects the law enforcement. It is with this regard that the thesis statement that this paper seeks to affirm is that the Patriot Act is designed to offer positive benefits to the goals of law enforcement and federal intelligence agencies that protect the American populations (Van Cleef 73). Topic sentence 1: Withstanding the presumed negatives that have come with intelligence investigation after the passing of the Patriot Act, surveillance strategies are actually necessary for securing the public welfare. The patriot Act is mainly aimed at protecting the nationals of the United States against terrorist attacks and surveillance form the enforcement agencies. Surveillance intelligence has widely been reviewed in the case of Mayfield following the terrorist Act and was typically depicted as Patriot Act on trial in the Nation Newspaper. This was a case that took shape in March 2004 where intelligence surveillance after conducting investigations, the FBI concluded that following the cross matching of partial finger prints in one of the bomb detonator bags, it matched that of Mayfield and he was arrested. His arrest was affirmed by in depth investigations that revealed that he was a Muslim convert and had been involved in a movement of Taliban’s that had wanted to go to Afghanistan to fight against the United States (Sarasohn 1). However, Mayfield being an attorney knew that the United States had no charges against him and being a citizen of the United States, challenged his arrest and conviction on the wake of the Patriot Act. This led to his release following additional surveillance that revealed that he was not the perpetrator behind the terrorism attack. This led Mayfield to challenge the protection assured by the Patriot Act since he affirmed that his protection, safety and privacy had been violated by the enforcement agencies during the investigations. The Mayfield trial is a clear indication of the effect the Patriot Act has on law enforcement especially with reference to intelligence investigations. Consequently, surveillance strategies depicted in the Patriot Act and Mayfield trial, affirm that the Patriot Act is indeed aimed at securing the public welfare. This therefore affirms the thesis statement that the Patriot Act is designed to offer positive benefits to the goals of law enforcement and federal intelligence agencies that protect the American populations (Sarasohn 1). Topic sentence 2: Patriot Act makes it possible for law officers to conduct search and seizure procedures without first notifying the individuals involved. Patriot Act of the United States gives law enforcement officers the mandate to seizure and act without warning in terrorist attempts. This gives the law enforcement officers an upper hand in the investigations and especially in the financial sector which has become a major terrorist avenue. The Patriot Act has provisions that enable the treasury to secure its finances by implementing anti-money launder mechanisms. These are not only aimed at reducing the financial terrorist attacks, but are also aimed at giving the law enforcement officers an upper hand in the wake of financial terrorism. However, this is an issue that has not gone uncontested especially as pertains to the secrecy of the financial statements of financial institutions following the wake of the Patriot Act. International financial organizations have criticized the upper hand that the law enforcement officers have in the wake of terrorism but this does not overshadow the greater benefit that the Patriot Act has on the American populations. The oversight power that is giving to the law enforcement agencies in the wake of financial terrorism affirm the thesis statement that the Patriot Act is designed to offer positive benefits to the goals of law enforcement and federal intelligence agencies that protect the American populations (Fisher, et al. 243). Consequently, a commentary published in May, 2003 revealed just to what extent the USA Patriot Act had given surveillance powers to the enforcement agencies. This gave the enforcement agencies the powers to review the most private research and communications which they suspected to have been involved in terrorism. Critics assert that thought the Act was aimed at protecting the American citizens from terrorist attacks, it also served as a viable violation to their privacy and secrecy especially in cases where the terrorist suspect could not be quantified (Matz 69). Critics avowed that the enforcement agencies that could not protect them from the terrorist attacks now had free flow and access to sensitive information about individuals and organizations, jeopardizing the secrecy of information accorded to every citizen of the United States. However, though this might be a drawback of the Patriot Act, it goes a long way in preventing terrorism attacks and thus affirms the thesis statement that that the Patriot Act is designed to offer positive benefits to the goals of law enforcement and federal intelligence agencies that protect the American populations (U.S. Department of Justice 1). Topic sentence 3: Write about President George W. Bush issue orders in November 2001 and had permitted the secretary of defense to order the indefinite detention of anyone suspected of terrorist acts. George W. Bush comments as pertains to the provisions of the Patriot Act commences with EO 13223 which orders to active duty the reserve of the armed forces commencing September 18, 2001. He thereafter proclaimed a state of national emergency following certification of terrorist attacks. Moreover, EO 13224 as avowed by Bush blocked the transaction of property and the prohibition of transactions with individuals who were suspected of perpetrating terrorism activities. Consequently, a task force would be implemented that would prepare the citizens on war against terrorism (Ball 107). There are enormous benefits that are tied to the USA Patriot Act but these do no shield us from addressing its major loophole as pertains to privacy and secrecy of the American citizens. This has been addressed in the measures that congress has put in place to ensure that the secrecy and the privacy of the American citizens has been upheld and still ensure that the law enforcement agencies are able to effectively curb terrorism attempts (Sales 1795). One such move was the move taken by Congress to halt funding to the Terrorism Information Agency (TIA). This was a program designed at scrutinizing every activity that was undertaken by every United States citizen and thus thwarting their privacy. In its place, software that could detect suspicious moves that suggested terrorist attacks could be detected instead of scrutinizing the citizen’s activities. This move aimed at enhancing the privacy of every citizen while curbing terrorist attempts while at it affirms the thesis statement of his paper that that the Patriot Act is designed to offer positive benefits to the goals of law enforcement and federal intelligence agencies that protect the American populations (Bradley A2). Conclusion USA Patriot is an act that encompasses major ingredients aimed at protecting the United States and its citizens from terrorism attacks. The Act inculcates the enhancement of domestic security in bid to curb terrorism. Subsequently, the Act involves the enhancement of surveillance procedures. Moreover, the Act inculcates International anti-money laundering and also anti-terrorism financing activities in bid to protect the American citizens from financial terrorism. The Act also addresses how the border will be protected, and strategies that will be put in place to aid at removing obstacles that may impede investigations on terrorism. It is also of relevance to not that the Patriot Act addresses the protection of suspects and their families. These are the issues that this paper has addressed as pertains to how the Patriot Act effects the law enforcement. However, it would not be prudent to ignore the loophole of privacy that has been depicted in the Patriot Act necessitating the need to address this issue. Though the Act is aimed at shielding the country from terrorist attacks, it should also be aimed at protecting the privacy of the citizen and the financial institutions. Measures aimed at enhancing privacy have been put in place and thus the Patriot Act is a viable document that has a beneficial effect on the law enforcement. In finality, the quantitative and qualitative benefits of the Patriot Act affirms the thesis statement of this research paper that the Patriot Act is indeed designed to offer positive benefits to the goals of law enforcement and federal intelligence agencies that protect the American populations. Work cited Ball, Howard. The USA Patriot Act of 2001: Balancing Civil Liberties and National Security: a Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2004. Print. Bradley Graham, "Poindexter Resigns but Defends Programs: Anti-Terrorism, Data Scanning Efforts at Pentagon Called Victims of Ignorance," The Washington Post, Aug. 13, 2003, p. A2. Web. 3 May, 2012 Fisher, James., Gilsinan, James., Harshman, Ellen., Islam, Muhammed., and Yeagar, Fred, "Assessing the Impact of the USA PATRIOT Act on the Financial Services Industry." Journal of Money Laundering Control 8.3 (2005): 243-51. ABI/INFORM Complete. Web. 3 May 2012. < http://search.proquest.com/docview/235959324?accountid=45049> Matz, Chris. “Libraries and the USA PATRIOT Act: Values in Conflict”, Journal of Library Administration, 2008, Vol. 47 Issue 3/4, p 69-87, 19p. Sales, Nathan Alexander. “Mending Walls: Information Sharing After the USA PATRIOT ACT”, Texas Law Review, Jun2010, Vol. 88 Issue 7, p1795-1854. Web 3 May, 2012 Sarasohn David, The Patriot Act on trial, September 8, 2005. Retrieved on 3 May 2012 from U.S. Department of Justice. Report to the House Judiciary Committee on the USA PATRIOT Act and Related Measures. May 13, 2003. Web. 3 May 2012, Available at: USA PATRIOT Act, Pub. L. No. 107-56, [sec] 311, 115 stat. 304 (2001) Van Cleef, Carol, R. "USA PATRIOT Act: Statutory Analysis and Regulatory Implementation." Journal of Financial Crime 11.1 (2003): 73-102. ABI/INFORM Complete. Web. 3 May 2012. Read More