The USA PATRIOT Act - Term Paper Example

The USA PATRIOT Act The laws of our country are very important to us and are what makes us unique from other nations. When something like the USA PATRIOT Act is passed, this law interferes with the privacy of citizens and contradicts our constitutional rights. The USA PATRIOT Act is one of the laws that has ignited a heated debate as many people criticize its abuse in implementation. The PATRIOTAct launched in 2001 as a reaction to the increased stress of terrorism attacks.The primary aim of the deed was to intercept the obstacles that made the process of detecting terrorist attacks difficult and slow.The Act granted the FBI the right to make urgent searches and arrests without having any arrest warrant or even a court order. This was to facilitate speedy action against suspects of terrorist acts.It is clear that the PATRIOT Act paved way for abuse of citizens’ rights of privacy and this was a full disregard for the constitution. The PATRIOT Act was launched in 2001 in the wake of terrorism as a way of aiding the government to respond promptly to the terrorist attacks. One of the provisions of the Act is that the FBI could conduct investigations with delayed search warrants and wiretap communications without the consent of the public. This permitted the FBI to see the homes of people they suspected to be involved with terrorism, investigate their bank accounts without even informing them prior to the deed. In addition, they could request for the information of potential suspects from the communication companies, including details such as phone conversations, IP address and messages (Whittenburg 28). The government strategy was to acquire intelligence on any terrorist threatening the most efficient manner. The government required the public to show their patriotism by admitting to the conditions of this Act. However, the justice department and the authorities have misused the PATRIOT on the innocent citizens. This law meant to counter terrorism expected to make the U.S citizens to show their patriotism by supporting it towards it agenda. Surprisingly, the events that have followed have left a lot to be desired. A woman of age 20 from Orange county was prosecuted by the justice department for planting threatening notes while on a cruise ship. The woman was travelling together with her family and feeling the need to reunite with her boyfriend, planted threats on the cruise ship to enable the cancellation of the journey. Her trick worked for her but was to be charged later by for violating the section of the US PATRIOT ACT that criminalizes threatening of mass transportation system. The lady served 20 years imprisonment after being found guilty of the charge. From this case story, the woman was obviously not a terrorist, neither was she supporting any act of terrorism and as such the PATRIOT act should have not been used to charge her. This reveals to us as citizens that the PATRIOT act is not to safeguard as from terrorism but rather to victimize us. The woman was charged using an anti-terrorism law yet she was just an innocent citizen prompted by the affection and desire to re unite with the boyfriend designed a trick to free herself. This law is being abused by using it to charge innocent citizens. Nevertheless, the PATRIOT Act contradicted the provisions of the organic law on the rights of the US citizens. To start with, the constitution provides the public with the right to secrecy in their houses, papers, and effects, which the new law violated. The Act permitted the FBI to conduct a search without any probable cause, which is against the people’s right to have explored in their houses only after warrants describing the grounds for the search are available (Concerned Citizens against the Patriot Act 1). In addition, the PATRIOT Act violated the rights of the citizens to be tried after arrest, providing that suspects could be arrested and jailed without any trial. Against the fundamental law, the PATRIOT Act allowed the FBI to listen to the private communications of their suspects without the knowledge of the people. From a close look, the Patriot Act vandalized the rights of the citizens that the constitution had provided. The PATRIOT Act cut deeply into a person’s right to privacy and personal liberties. These are against the spirit of the constitution of the land. Since enforcement, there has been a lot of violation of civil rights. This has been so due to the law enforcement authorities relying on the Acts powers. A case in point is that of Brandon Mayfield. He was then apprehended in connection with the bombings in Madrid that occurred in the year 2004. Mayfield then was held for two weeks and his home searched by the authorities without his consent. The American Civil Liberties Union has described this search as an abuse of the PATRIOT Act. This is because the authorities were looking for evidence to link Mayfield to the Madrid bombings. This case underscores the PATRIOT Act’s potential for potential for abuse. This is why the patriot act is one regrettable law. Mayfield had his rights infringed by the secret search of his house. This is an infringement of a person’s rights to privacy and personal liberty. A hidden consequence of the PATRIOT Act that the citizens of America may not obviously see is the dangerous unprecedented expansion of the powers of the president. This law has made the president treat the war on terror as armed conflict and as such invoked constitutionally provided powers of a commander in chief. The patriot act led to former president Bush authorization of the eavesdropping on American s by the national security agencies without a court warrant. This was in violation to the constitution of the land. The same led to locking up of an American born citizen by the name Jose Padilla who was accused of making plots for bombing locked in a solitary confinement for 3 years without being tried. His right to trial was infringed and himself locked in an enemy combatant within a solitary confinement for 3 years. This Patriot Act violates the constitutional rights of the citizens of the United States of America. The president has used the same act to acquire absolute authority which is unconstitutional and as such is in total disregard of the constitution. Laws made should be in tandem with the constitution of the land. They should promote the spirit of the constitution and should be geared towards the common good of the Citizens. This is why participation is encouraged in formulation of any law. However, laws that are infringing on the rights of the public should either be done away with or amended. The Patriot Act does not hold the spirit and later of the constitution. Worse, however, this Act paved way for the misuse of the constitution by the federal authorities. Since its establishment, there is evidence that the federal agencies have used this new law as a ground to conduct searches that have no link to national security. There have been various instances when the federal agencies have used these rights to access the bank information of persons for personal reasons. At times, this information is available to criminals as they target their prey. Along this line, the act has provided a reason for people to worry rather be satisfied about national security. Some criminals have taken advantage of these laws to act like the FBI and attack homeowners, robbing them of their properties (Gilbert 3-7). The misuse of this law by the federal bodies as well as opportunistic criminals shows that the law has become a larger threat to the masses rather than a reassurance of home protection. It is quite absurd that the PATRIOT Act seems more concerned with spying innocent Americans rather than investigating potential actual or potential terrorists (Wralstad & Lutz, 23). As citizens of the US, we do not really feel the need for it since its focus can be understood as not directed to potential terrorists. Most of the controversial provisions in this act are similar to the expansions of the law enforcement authorities that were sought after Waco siege by state and federal officials in the 1990s and were resisted strongly by Civil libertarians. Even though, they were less successful. This PATRIOT Act can be viewed as a move to deliberately give surveillance powers that are extraordinary to investigate those politically dissenting or minor criminals and not terrorists as it were. A report from the justice department by the inspector general revealed the F.B.I. involved in serious and widespread abuse of authority. The victims of this abuse were discovered not to have clear connections with terrorism yet were handled as one. Another occasion where the US PATRIOT Act was in contravention with the fundamental rights and freedoms of a person were evident in a case in February 2003 about a foreign student. The case was branded giving and expert advice and assistance to terrorist. A university of Idaho student by the name Sami al-Hussayen got apprehended and faced prosecution according to section 805 of the US PATRIOT Act. This section makes it a crime for anybody to lend or any assistance or expert advice to an organization of terrorist. Sami al-Hussayen was working for Islamic Assembly of North America as a web master. While executing his duty which was to supply web links to the speeches by well-known Muslim scholars he was considered aiding a terrorist organization. This was so because some of the speeches were advocating criminal activity as well as suicide operations. Sami al-Hussayen was found not guilty by the jury of all the charges on him. This is because there was not way he could be held responsible for the content of materials he supplied. Therefore prosecuting this student is much a kin to prosecuting a newspaper that provides a link to an Al Qaeda threat tape or Osama bin Laden’s video statement. It therefore is an infringement to a right access to communication. Even the manner in which the PATRIOT At was passed in the year 2001 was not satisfactory. The act was passed in a quick manner allowing very little time for debate and understanding of the law. It is in doubt whether the senators really read this comprehensive document before passing it in the congress (Wralstad & Lutz, 7). This rushed decision has made our land a completely different place. The freedoms enjoyed by the public that were enshrined in the constitution are now at stake. It has remained but a wish. The civil liberties, the rights to privacy, freedoms from these kind of unreasonable and unwarranted searches, have been infringed by the ability of the government to spy on the communication of the public without notice. The powers of the executive has been expanded greatly, the checks and balances that are crucial to hold the government to account have been stripped off by this PATRIOT Act, judicial reviews have been gagged, rights of due process infringed among the many other draconian aspects of this act. The worst that any law can bring to its citizens are experienced in this Patriot Act. This law should be repealed or amended to the least. The patriot debate is way far from ending. Wralstad & Lutz, (31 -37) discusses the contentious sections of this Act, which include among others section 6001: “lone wolf”. This section in permitting the secret surveillance of the non US persons even if they are not affiliated to any organizations that are foreign is an infringement on their rights. Any government investigatory powers are limited to the extent of it borders and as such this provision should not be used. Section 206 provides authority for the government to order intelligence surveillance without identity of people ora places to be taped or recorded. The traditional norms of seizure and search are different with this case. Roving wiretaps should be utilised in a manner that are similar with the criminal laws provisions and not in the sense that compromises a person’s privacy and liberty. Section 215 is also in contravention to the tradition of seizure and search. The government should not search or seize a person’s property without giving concrete justification as to the linkage between the property and the alleged terrorism activity. These reasons sufficiently give evidence of the unconstitutionalism of the PATRIOT Act of 2001. The acs bring s more harm than the intended good to the public. As such repealing this act or amending all the contentious clauses is the way forward towards making a better America that her citizens can be proud to be a part. That is the only drive for patriotism and not this Act. The PATRIOT Act is one major legislative blunder. Its disadvantages far out way the benefits. Wralstad, & Lutz, (2014) discusses that, this is a legislation that has seen numerous wrong accusations of the media. This limits the freedom of communication. An example is the case where a request was made for the journalists who had interviewed Adrian Lamo, a computer intruder, to preserve well their notes as they petition the justice department to allow them to force delivery of that information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This is one example where the PATRIOT Act has been used wrongly or in a manner that is in contravention with the law. This involved journalists who worked for newspapers, television and wire service reporters. The move to request for a subpoena in this case was wrong and as such was turned down by the Department of Justice. The PATRIOT Act was also used wrongly by the FBI in April 2004 to demand a hand over record for a business that had nothing in any way to relate with terrorism. This was targeted at the opposition. The department of Justice however prevented this by disallowing ACLU from releasing the information. Members of the public, very innocent and occasionally just dissenting on certain wrongs from the government have been victims of misuse of the PATRIOT Act. They have been subjected to wrongful accusations under this act. There have also been cases of blanket request for information of finances of private people visiting the city of Las Vegas. This is not right. It infringes on a person’s privacy and liberty to move about freely. In conclusion, the PATRIOT Act was a total disregard for the US constitution rather than a reassurance of national security. While the government established this law as a response to increasing terror attacks, the law contradicted the provisions of the constitution on human rights. The law allowed the FBI to access private homes, communications, and arrest without warrant by court order and without any judicial trial of suspects. This was a complete inversion of the rights of the US citizens provided in the constitution. In its application, the federal bodies have interfered with the secrecy of many people and the courts have jailed many innocent people.On some occasions, the federal bodies have used these laws abusively to access private information of people for matters that are least related to security. Therefore, there is a need torevise these laws to ensure that they do not collide with the constitutional rights of the people. Works Cited Concerned Citizens Against the Patriot Act. Patriot Act Vs.Constitution.2013. Accessed [Accessed on 26 Nov, 2014] Gilbert, Francoise. "Demystifying the United States Patriot Act." Journal Of Internet Law 16.8 (2013): 3-7. Business Source Complete. Web. 26 Nov 2014. Whittenburg, Catherine. "Patriots act: if the president fired George McClellan, would he leave?." Americas Civil War 2013: 28. General OneFile. Web. 26 Nov 2014. Wralstad Ulmschneider, G., & Lutz, J. M. (2014). USA Patriot Act. The Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Read More