The Patriot Act: Case Study - Research Paper Example

The Patriot Act: Case Study The Patriot Act which took birth as a result of September 11 has armed the government and law enforcement agencies with a lot of power to do almost anything to thwart terrorism. However, the fact is that this power has taken away the privacy and liberty-a very necessary part of American life-from the lives of people. One of the perfect examples of this situation is the case of Ashton Lundeby, a sixteen year old who was arrested for allegedly sending bomb threat; and according to reports, he was arrested from his home on the night of 15 February and is denied the right to get due process (Lamb, 2009). Admittedly, there are various powers given to the Federal agents under the Patriot Act. Firstly, they have the right to conduct surveillance and searches even without any probable cause to suspect criminal activity. Moreover, it is allowed to conduct searches without giving prior notice. Another serious issue is that after conducting electronic search or wiretapping, it is possible for the federal agents to secretly arrest a person and divulge no information to the family. Moreover, as McNeill (2011) points out, the Act allows federal agents to keep the matter away from media and attorney for as long as charges are not brought. That means a person who is suspected of terrorist activity may lose all the rights as a citizen. Evidently, the case is interpreted to be Patriot Act case because of the nature of the case. First of all, it was a bomb threat and the medium was internet calls. It is the Patriot Act that gave federal agents the right to search electronic communication, and arrest and retain people without disclosing the matter. In the case of Ashton Lundeby, the federal agents allegedly gave no information to the family or media. Moreover, there was no legal representation allowed. Thus, the case is interpreted as a Patriot Act case. In my opinion, this case is not to be considered as a Patriot Act case. In fact, the case does not involve any probable cause to suspect the teenager as a terrorist. So, the case does not require to be handled according to the federal law which deals with bomb and death threats. In the USAM, Title 9, chapter 9, it is pointed out that 18 U.S.C Section 844(e) must not be used unless high degree of Federal interest is involved. For example, if the situation involves a bomb threat by a student against a school, the case is supposed to be deferred to the State or local authorities. Furthermore, it is pointed out that investigations as provided under Section 844(e) do not need to be initiated if a pattern or plan for the offense does not exist. Thus, it becomes evident that the case does not need to be treated under Patriot Act. Evidently, any law like the Patriot Act will have a very negative impact on the quality of civil rights in a nation like America. This is so because the Patriot Act has provided the federal agents the right to look into the private lives of people and listen to everything they communicate. Moreover, it is seen that instead of addressing real terrorism, this new step has touched every sphere of life and protest, and affected areas like freedom of association, freedom of information, freedom of speech, right to legal representation, freedom from unreasonable searches, right to a public trial, and right to liberty. However, the problem with the new step, according to SNR Denton report (n.d.), is that the government has not so far proved that these initiatives are useful in preventing terrorism. Admittedly, it is not possible to counter terrorism without introducing stringent laws. Secondly, though the search by federal agencies intrude privacy, it is better to have ones privacy taken away by the government than by terrorists. Moreover, as Brawley and Perekrestov (n.d.) argue, only those who communicate something illegal need to fear the close monitoring by federal agencies. For others, it offers added sense of security and belonging. However, the present problem with the system is the vague definition of terrorism and the porous nature of the law. Also, there is the issue of misuse of the provisions of the new powers by the agencies. First of all, the concept of terrorism should be redefined so that issues like the threat by a school student never get classified as terrorism. Secondly, peaceful protests, right to information, and right for legal representation are all matters to be accommodated. Furthermore, federal agents should be trained to identify the cases where Federal issues are considerably involved. In total, it becomes evident that in order to better fight terrorism, it is necessary to have such laws. However, the laws should be well-defined so that only those who indulge in criminal activities are made to suffer. Evidently, technology that shows that a crime originated at a particular place is enough evidence to conduct a raid; not for an arrest. This is so because in certain circumstances, it is possible that a person is kept as hostage and some criminals have misused his computer, internet or other equipment. In such case, failing to conduct a raid will have serious impact on the security of that person too. Secondly, conducting a study about the character of that person will never reveal the real issue behind. Also, knowingly or unknowingly, the person has got involved in the criminal activity. So, a raid at the location is justified.The most important reform required in the Patriot Act is that the person should be allowed to defend their side in a court of law. In the present case, the mother of the youngster claims that legal aid is not available as the case is under Patriot Act. So, the reform required is that the family of the detained person should be informed about the charges, and should be allowed to approach a court if they feel that there is no probable cause to suspect criminal activity or if they feel that the case does not involve considerable Federal interest to use Patriot Act. If the court prima facie feels that the claim is sustainable, the person should be immediately released. References Brawley, T & Perekrestov, M. (n. d.). Libraries and Privacy: The Impact of the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved from http://tessabrawley.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/libraries-and-privacy.pdf Lamb, A. (2009). Mom says Patriot Act stripped son of due process. WRAL.com. retrieved from http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5049867/ McNeill, J. B. (2011). The Patriot Act and the Constitution: Five Key Points. WebMemo. Heritage Foundation.3148: 1-2. Retrieved from http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2011/pdf/wm3148.pdf SNR Denton report. (n.d.). The USA Patriot Act: Implications for Cloud Computing. Noerr. Retrieved from http://www.snrdenton.com/pdf/USA_Patriot_Act_Cloud_Computing.pdf USAM Chapter 9-63.000. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/63mcrm.htm#9-63.922 Read More