Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Patriot Act Misinformation (ACLU ads)
Wall Street Journal ^ | October 1, 2004 | Editorial

Posted on 10/01/2004 5:49:33 AM PDT by OESY

The American Civil Liberties Union has been spinning its victory in a federal court in New York this week as a blow against the USA Patriot Act. One typical headline: "Federal Judge Calls Patriot Act Secret Searches Unconstitutional." An ACLU press release hails the decision as "a landmark victory against the Ashcroft Justice Department."

...No. If reporters had bothered to read Judge Victor Marrero's decision, they would have learned that the law he actually struck down was a provision of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986. Section 2709 authorizes the FBI to issue "National Security Letters" to obtain information from wire communications companies about their subscribers. NSLs are issued secretly and the recipient is prohibited from notifying anyone about the request.

As Judge Marrero noted in his ruling, "Section 2790 has been available to the FBI since 1986." He concludes that there must have been "hundreds" of NSLs issued since that time. The Patriot Act did amend Section 2790, but that amendment has nothing to do with the part that Judge Marrero says is unconstitutional.

One more thing: The Electronics Communications Act was not the invention of John Ashcroft. It was sponsored by that famous and menacing right-winger, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, who said at the time that Section 2790 "provides a clear procedure for access to telephone toll records in counterintelligence investigations."

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: New York; US: Vermont; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aclu; civilliberties; electronics; fbi; leahy; marrero; patriotact; privacy; section2790; usapatriotact

1 posted on 10/01/2004 5:49:34 AM PDT by OESY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OESY

Splitting hairs: On one day, defenders of the "PATRIOT" Acts say they are just a constinuation of previous expansions of government power, and on this day they say they stand apart.

F*ck 'em all. Our government is not out to protect us, but to protect itself. Time to cut 'em down to size.


2 posted on 10/01/2004 6:37:27 AM PDT by eno_ (Freedom Lite, it's almost worth defending.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OESY
One more thing: The Electronics Communications Act was not the invention of John Ashcroft. It was sponsored by that famous and menacing right-winger, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy

Take that, ACLU! I'm so sick of these whiny hippie ACLUers lounging outside of Trader Joe's spouting their foolishness...I've often wondered how many of these idiots have any idea whatsoever of what's in the Patriot Act and what's not.

3 posted on 10/01/2004 9:31:41 AM PDT by T. Buzzard Trueblood ("the most interesting debate -- the one John Kerry is having with himself" -Rudy Giuliani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eno_

I'm with you.


4 posted on 10/01/2004 9:34:56 AM PDT by WhiteGuy (Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson