Surveillance and Wiretapping Under the Patriot II Act

America for Sale ^ | January 27, 2004 | America for Sale

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Surveillance and Wiretapping Under the Patriot II Act

Some conservative groups are finding common ground with organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, expressing concerns about the effect that the USA Patriot Act and the follow-up law, the Domestic Security Enhancement Act (a.k.a. “Patriot II”), could have on civil liberties.

Liberal critics have directed much of their worry at what they saw as an attack on immigrants' rights in the Patriot Act, the massive measure that was passed as the country was reeling from the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Now, right-leaning groups such as the American Conservative Union, the Eagle Forum and Gun Owners of America say they are concerned that American citizens could also be victimized by what they say are unconstitutional law enforcement powers allowed by the Patriot and the enhancement act. The heart of the issue, according to conservatives, liberals and constitutional scholars, is the effect that USA Patriot has already had on issues of probable cause and due process, and that both of those concepts would be further eroded with the so-called Patriot II Act.

link: Conservative Backlash: Provisions of ‘Patriot II’ Draft Worry Those on Right [abc] - 03/12/03

According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), among its most severe problems, the “Patriot II” bill:

Diminishes personal privacy by removing checks on government power, specifically by
• Making it easier for the government to initiate surveillance and wiretapping of U.S. citizens under the authority of the top-secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. (Sections 101, 102 and 107)
• Permitting the government, under certain circumstances, to bypass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court altogether and conduct warrantless wiretaps and searches. (Sections 103 and 104)
• Sheltering federal agents engaged in illegal surveillance without a court order from criminal prosecution if they are following orders of high Executive Branch officials. (Section 106)
• Creating a new category of “domestic security surveillance” that permits electronic eavesdropping of entirely domestic activity under looser standards than are provided for ordinary criminal surveillance under Title III. (Section 122)
• Using an overbroad definition of terrorism that could cover some protest tactics such as those used by Operation Rescue or protesters at Vieques Island, Puerto Rico as a new predicate for criminal wiretapping and other electronic surveillance. (Sections 120 and 121)
• Providing for general surveillance orders covering multiple functions of high tech devices, and by further expanding pen register and trap and trace authority for intelligence surveillance of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. (Sections 107 and 124)
• Creating a new, separate crime of using encryption technology that could add five years to any sentence for crimes committed with a computer. (Section 404)
• Expanding nationwide search warrants so they do not have to meet even the broad definition of terrorism in the USA PATRIOT Act. (Section 125)
• Giving the government secret access to credit reports without consent and without judicial process. (Section 126)
• Enhancing the government’s ability to obtain sensitive information without prior judicial approval by creating administrative subpoenas and providing new penalties for failure to comply with written demands for records. (Sections 128 and 129)
• Allowing for the sampling and cataloguing of innocent Americans’ genetic information without court order and without consent. (Sections 301-306)
• Permitting, without any connection to anti-terrorism efforts, sensitive personal information about U.S. citizens to be shared with local and state law enforcement. (Section 311)
• Terminating court-approved limits on police spying, which were initially put in place to prevent McCarthy-style law enforcement persecution based on political or religious affiliation. (Section 312)
• Permitting searches, wiretaps and surveillance of United States citizens on behalf of foreign governments – including dictatorships and human rights abusers – in the absence of Senate-approved treaties. (Sections 321-22)

Diminishes public accountability by increasing government secrecy; specifically, by
• Authorizing secret arrests in immigration and other cases, such as material witness warrants, where the detained person is not criminally charged. (Section 201)
• Threatening public health by severely restricting access to crucial information about environmental health risks posed by facilities that use dangerous chemicals. (Section 202)
• Harming fair trial rights for American citizens and other defendants by limiting defense attorneys from challenging the use of secret evidence in criminal cases. (Section 204)
• Gagging grand jury witnesses in terrorism cases to bar them from discussing their testimony with the media or the general public, thus preventing them from defending themselves against rumor-mongering and denying the public information it has a right to receive under the First Amendment. (Section 206)

Diminishes corporate accountability under the pretext of fighting terrorism; specifically, by
• Granting immunity to businesses that provide information to the government in terrorism investigations, even if their actions are taken with disregard for their customers’ privacy or other rights and show reckless disregard for the truth. Such immunity could provide an incentive for neighbor to spy on neighbor and pose problems similar to those inherent in Attorney General Ashcroft’s “Operation TIPS.” (Section 313)

Undermines fundamental constitutional rights of Americans under overbroad definitions of “terrorism” and “terrorist organization” or under a terrorism pretext; specifically by
• Stripping even native-born Americans of all of the rights of United States citizenship if they provide support to unpopular organizations labeled as terrorist by our government, even if they support only the lawful activities of such organizations, allowing them to be indefinitely imprisoned in their own country as undocumented aliens. (Section 501)
• Creating 15 new death penalties, including a new death penalty for “terrorism” under a definition which could cover acts of protest such as those used by Operation Rescue or protesters at Vieques Island, Puerto Rico, if death results. (Section 411)
• Further criminalizing association – without any intent to commit specific terrorism crimes – by broadening the crime of providing material support to terrorism, even if support is not given to any organization listed as a terrorist organization by the government. (Section 402)
• Permitting arrests and extraditions of Americans to any foreign country – including those whose governments do not respect the rule of law or human rights – in the absence of a Senate-approved treaty and without allowing an American judge to consider the extraditing country’s legal system or human rights record. (Section 322)

Unfairly targets immigrants under the pretext of fighting terrorism; specifically by
• Undercutting trust between police departments and immigrant communities by opening sensitive visa files to local police for the enforcement of complex immigration laws. (Section 311)
• Targeting undocumented workers with extended jail terms for common immigration offenses. (Section 502)
• Providing for summary deportations without evidence of crime, criminal intent or terrorism, even of lawful permanent residents, whom the Attorney General says are a threat to national security. (Section 503)
• Completely abolishing fair hearings for lawful permanent residents convicted of even minor criminal offenses through a retroactive “expedited removal” procedure, and preventing any court from questioning the government’s unlawful actions by explicitly exempting these cases from habeas corpus review. Congress has not exempted any person from habeas corpus -- a protection guaranteed by the Constitution -- since the Civil War. (Section 504)
• Allowing the Attorney General to deport an immigrant to any country in the world, even if there is no effective government in such a country. (Section 506)

link: Section-by-Section Analysis of Justice Department draft “Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003,” also known as “PATRIOT Act II” [aclu] - 01/14/03

On January 26th, 2004, a federal judge declared unconstitutional a section of the USA Patriot Act that bars giving expert advice or assistance to groups designated foreign terrorist organizations.

David Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who argued the case on behalf of the Humanitarian Law Project, declared the ruling "a victory for everyone who believes the war on terrorism ought to be fought consistent with constitutional principles."

"It Is the first federal court decision declaring any part of the Patriot Act unconstitutional," he said. The case before the court involved five groups and two U.S. citizens seeking to provide support for lawful, nonviolent activities on behalf of Kurdish refugees in Turkey. The Humanitarian Law Project said the plaintiffs were threatened with 15 years in prison if they advised groups on seeking a peaceful resolution of the Kurds' campaign for self-determination in Turkey.

The judge's ruling said the law, as written, does not differentiate between impermissible advice on violence and encouraging the use of peaceful, nonviolent means to achieve goals.

link: Part of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional [ap] - 01/26/04

Lost amid the tumult surrounding Saddam Hussein’s December 14 capture was enactment of a measure radically extending federal counter-terrorism powers. Most of the details of H.R. 2417, the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 2004 "are secret, including the total cost of the programs, which are estimated to be about $40 billion," noted an AP story. That amount is "slightly more than Bush had requested." The measure’s publicized portions include new FBI powers "to demand financial records from casinos, car dealerships, and other businesses," as well as several pilot programs permitting data exchanges between agencies.

Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) opposed the measure, insisting that it "should outrage every single American citizen." "It appears we are witnessing a stealth enactment of the enormously unpopular ‘PATRIOT II’ legislation that was first leaked several months ago," stated Rep. Paul in a November 20 speech on the House floor. "These expanded police powers will enable the FBI to demand transaction records from businesses … without the approval or knowledge of a judge or grand jury. This was written into the bill at the 11th hour over the objections of members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would normally have jurisdiction over the FBI."

"I also have concerns about the rest of the bill," continued Rep. Paul. "One of the few things we do know about this final version is that we are authorizing even more than the president has requested for the intelligence community.... Despite the tens of billions we spend on these myriad intelligence agencies, it is impossible to ignore the failure of our federal intelligence community to detect and prevent the September 11 attacks."

link: Stealth Implementation of "PATRIOT ACT II" [New American] - 01/12/04

link: Bush Grabs New Power for FBI [WIRED] - 01/06/04

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

THIS is stunning, and not in a good way. This act should be resisted with every fiber of one's being!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Police State BUMP!

[agitator]

Paging Jackboots. Jackboots to the brown courtesy phone....

[Joe Bfstplk]

Can you imagine Hillary with this kind of power? You see the havoc her 800+ FBI files wreaked.

[countrydummy]

self bump for later reading

[diotima]

Guess I don't have to ping you....

[ChefKeith]

NAZI BTTT/ Hydrant Marking for later read

[TheSpottedOwl]

Holy crap! How do we get rid of this?

[ezo4]

try and sniff my traffic suckers

not that anybody would need to too :o)

[Bella]

Remember when this was first posted on this forum?? There were a lot of people who didn't believe what this was..time to stand up for our rights because apparently someone doesn't like what we have.

[Txslady]

bump for later reading

[Gore_ War_ Vet]

When are we going to acknowledge this is happening under a REPUBLICAN administration with a REPUBLICAN Senate and House.

Is this what we fought for?

When do we say enough is enough?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

When do we say enough is enough?

I plan on doing just that on November 2 by voting third party (Constitution or Libertarian).

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Holy crap! How do we get rid of this?

If you hear of the PATRIOT-in-Name-Only-II act being mulled in Congress, write you congresscritters and Jorge Arbusto, I guess...

[TheSpottedOwl]

If you hear of the PATRIOT-in-Name-Only-II act being mulled in Congress, write you congresscritters and Jorge Arbusto, I guess...

Ugh, my congresscritters :-(

[Gore_ War_ Vet]

I plan on doing just that on November 2 by voting third party (Constitution or Libertarian).

If w's supporters such as you and I have come to this conclusion, I think the Nov. doings may not be the cake walk they're predicting. One can hope.

[MagnusMaximus1]

Bump!