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

To: jenny65
Bullsh|t. Some of the most unconstitutional and draconian provisions of the act, such as sneak n peek, have no sunset. They're permanent. I really wish these people would get it right.

We all need to get it right. How do you know what does and does not sunset in the Patriot Act?

8 posted on 08/20/2002 5:34:25 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Bill
Sensenbrenner says no one cares except some
libertarians & a few lawmakers.
Is he just putting on a show or is that the
reporter's spin, or both?
10 posted on 08/20/2002 9:04:12 PM PDT by metalbird1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: FreeReign
FreeReign,

All I've done is read the thing myself. Let me emphasize that I'm not a law expert. However, here's a decent analysis of it. At the very bottom, they list what does and what doesn't sunset:
EFF Analysis Of The Provisions Of The USA PATRIOT Act That Relate To Online Activities (Oct 31, 2001)

The article only discusses the provisions related to computers, phone taps, etc. I might be able to find a better article that discusses everything, but I've spent too much time at work writing this already.

Here's where you can read the full text of the Patriot Act:
USA PATRIOT ACT

Most of it is impossible to make sense of without having the U.S Code to compare it to. In any event, here's the Sunset section:

SEC. 224. SUNSET.


(a) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in subsection (b), this title and the amendments made by this title (other than sections 203(a), 203(c), 205, 208, 210, 211, 213, 216, 219, 221, and 222, and the amendments made by those sections) shall cease to have effect on December 31, 2005.

(b) EXCEPTION- With respect to any particular foreign intelligence investigation that began before the date on which the provisions referred to in subsection (a) cease to have effect, or with respect to any particular offense or potential offense that began or occurred before the date on which such provisions cease to have effect, such provisions shall continue in effect.

Section 213 (in bold above) is the sneak and peek:

SEC. 213. AUTHORITY FOR DELAYING NOTICE OF THE EXECUTION OF A WARRANT.


Section 3103a of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by inserting `(a) IN GENERAL- ' before `In addition'; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

`(b) DELAY- With respect to the issuance of any warrant or court order under this section, or any other rule of law, to search for and seize any property or material that constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States, any notice required, or that may be required, to be given may be delayed if--

`(1) the court finds reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate notification of the execution of the warrant may have an adverse result (as defined in section 2705);

`(2) the warrant prohibits the seizure of any tangible property, any wire or electronic communication (as defined in section 2510), or, except as expressly provided in chapter 121, any stored wire or electronic information, except where the court finds reasonable necessity for the seizure; and

`(3) the warrant provides for the giving of such notice within a reasonable period of its execution, which period may thereafter be extended by the court for good cause shown.'.


That's just one of the exceptions to the sunset. I'm not against all of the provisions in the Act, but section 213 blatantly violates the Fourth Amendment. "Delayed Notice" is just a clever way to try to get around it.
16 posted on 08/21/2002 8:42:46 AM PDT by jenny65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

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