Uniting and Strengthening America Act - Essay Example

Following the September 11, 2001 attack, a panicked Congress passed an overnight revision of the United States surveillance laws that greatly expanded the authority of the government to spy on its own citizens with reduction in checks and balances on such powers as judicial oversight. The bill, which got the name the United State’s PATRIOT Act, was characterized by a number of amendments and represented Federal Bureau of Investigators’ successful use of the terrorist attacks to roll back unwanted checks on its power. This paper discusses the United States of America’s PATRIOT Act (2001), the reason for its enactment, the changes it brought to the law of the United States as well as its amendments to federal statutes. It also discusses some of the controversies surrounding the passing of the bill. Introduction The USA PATRIOT Act, an acronym for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, was passed by the Congress of the United States and was quickly enacted with little opposition on October 26, 2001 as a rejoinder to the terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. The only person who vehemently opposed and voted against the bill was Senator Russ Feingold and to some extent, Senator Patrick Leahy. Of particular concern to Russ Feingold were the effects the Act might have on immigrants’ civil liberties. However, supporters as well as detractors saw many parts as necessary. This legislation, which has ten titles with each title containing numerous sections, originated with Attorney General John Ashcroft. Ashcroft asked Congress for additional powers, which he alleged were required to fight terrorism following the September 11, 2001events. Congress made few amendments to the initial proposal of Ashcroft and without any markup or hearing by a Congressional committee, the bill became law. The main Provisions of the United States’ PATRIOT Act include: The strengthening of criminal laws against terrorism, the removal of obstacles to terrorism investigation, intelligence capabilities’ improvement, assistance and aid provision to terrorism victims, public safety officers and their families, the northern border protection, surveillance procedures’ enhancement, terrorism financing and money laundering abatement, increased information sharing between state, local and federal governments and the improvement of domestic security against terrorism. Electronic Privacy Information Center asserts that the Act was a compromise version of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, which was an extensive legislative package whose main aim was to strengthen the United States of America’s defense against terrorism. The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 (ATA) comprised several provisions expanding the law enforcement and intelligence agencies’ authority to access personal information and monitor private communications greatly. A few additions that were beneficial from the initial proposal of the Administration were included in the final legislation. A so-called sunset provision on some of the provisions for electronic surveillance was the most notable. This provision provides that after a while, unless openly renewed by Congress, several sections of the act expire automatically. There was also an amendment that provided judicial supervision of use of Carnivore system of the Federal Bureau of Investigation by law enforcement. The United States of America’s PATRIOT Act introduced far-reaching changes to the law of the United States, including amendments to federal statutes such as the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), Fair Credit Reporting Act, Immigration and Nationality Act, Wiretap Statute (Title III), Bank Secrecy Act ,Pen Register and Trap and Trace Statute, Right to Financial Privacy Act, Money Laundering Act and Money Laundering Control Act (Electronic Privacy Information Center, para10). Just to mention a few, the implications of the Act with regard to online privacy are substantial. The Act, for instance, increases the law enforcement agencies’ ability to authorize installation of pen registers as well as trace and trap devices in addition to ability to authorize the installation of such devices in order to record all computer- information regarding routing, addressing along with signaling. While the outgoing phone numbers placed from a particular telephone line are collected using a pen register, the incoming numbers placed to a particular phone line are captured using a trap and trace device. Moreover the Act extends the ability of the government to gain access to student information and personal financial information devoid of any wrongdoing suspicion. The government does this by simply certifying that there is likelihood that the information probable to be obtained has relevance with an ongoing criminal investigation thereby affecting Surveillance and Privacy Laws (McCarthy, para2). These amendments increased the Federal Bureau of Investigation and law enforcement’s investigative and surveillance powers when dealing with terrorism although sections of the bill also generally apply to criminal acts. It increased the number of offenses related to terror and expanded crimes, reporting requirements and penalties related to laundering money. For instance, the Act gives regulatory powers to the United State’s Secretary of the Treasury to fight corruption of financial institutions of the United States for purposes of foreign laundering money; it establishes new crimes, new penalties and procedural techniques to be used against international as well as domestic terrorists and it is more actively involved in closing United State’s borders to foreign terrorists and in confining and removing those within her borders. It also increased the Federal Bureau of Investigation and law enforcement’s authority in tracking and intercepting stored electronic data and communications, business, library, educational and medical records for the purposes of foreign intelligence gathering and law enforcement, extended the bylaws governing wiretaps as well as ‘trap and trace’ phone devices to electronic and internet communications among others (American Library Association, para1&2). The PATRIOT Act also introduced a plethora of legislative changes that amplified the investigative and surveillance powers of the United States’ law enforcement agencies significantly. On the other hand, the Act failed to provide for the system of checks and balances that customarily, in the face of such legislation, safeguards civil liberties. In spite of the Act having made considerable amendments to more than fifteen significant statutes, it lacks background legislative history, which frequently in retrospect provides necessary statutory interpretation owing to the fact that its introduction was hasty and passed with little debate in addition to having no Senate, House or conference report. Conclusion Since the enactment of the Patriot Act, controversy has covered it. While its proponents deem it a necessary evil in the face of new threats to America in the dynamic global political climate, to civil libertarians, it is an unpatriotic means of infringing on individual privacy rights and on free-speech, interfering with freedom of the press and limiting civil rights. Electronic Privacy Information Center asserts that in addition to protests by civil libertarians, librarians and other American Civil Liberties Unions have raised protests against changes made by the Act arguing that some have the potential to bring about law-enforcement abuses such as an obscurely broadened definition of providing terrorists with material support, expansion of law-enforcement access to records that third-party organizations and businesses hold and reduced wiretaps’ judicial oversight among others. The American Library Association believes some sections of the PATRIOT Act endanger library users’ privacy as well as their constitutional rights. The library profession’s main concern is that some provisions in the Act surpass the traditional methods of accessing information from libraries. The fact that the Act was designed partly to lessen restrictions enacted in response to government power abuses connected to civil-rights groups, anti-Vietnam War protesters, Watergate, among others partly prompt such concerns. Owing to the controversial nature of the USA PATRIOT Act, a number of bills with which to amend it were proposed including the Security and Freedom Ensured Act, the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act and the Protecting the Rights of Individuals Act. However, none of them passed. Works cited American Library Association, (2009). The USA Patriot Act in the Library. Retrieved 31st January, 2010, from http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/ifissues/usapatriotlibrary.pdf Electronic Privacy Information Center, (2009). USA Patriot Act. Retrieved 31st January, 2010, from http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot/ McCarthy, K. (2002). USA PATRIOT ACT Results in Amendments to FERPA; NASFAA Training Materials Updated. Retrieved 31st January, 2010, from http://www.nasfaa.org/publications/2002/ctferpaupdate061202.html Read More