Posted on 07/24/2003 9:41:47 AM PDT by Brian S
07/24/03
Curt Anderson Associated Press
Washington - The Justice Department raised strong objections yesterday to a surprising 309-118 House vote against covert "sneak and peek" searches in criminal investigations, a move that sponsors said reflected civil liberties concerns raised by the anti-terrorism USA Patriot Act.
"I think the message that 309 votes tells me is that people have the opportunity to look back and say, What have we really done?' " said Rep. C.L. "Butch" Otter, Republican of Idaho. "I think it's given unbridled authority to the federal law enforcement agencies."
The Patriot Act strengthened government surveillance and law enforcement powers, removed a barrier to the CIA and other intelligence agencies sharing information with law enforcement officials, and added a number of provisions aimed at disrupting terrorism financing.
"Our success in preventing another catastrophic attack on the U.S. homeland would have been much more difficult, if not impossible, without several of the provisions of that act," FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday.
Civil liberties advocates say there is a greater chance that government can snoop on innocent people.
The law permits agents to search the home of a suspected drug dealer, or plant a listening device in the car of a reputed mobster, or copy a computer hard drive of a terror suspect, without notifying the suspect until later. That keeps suspects from escaping, destroying evidence or tampering with witnesses, for example.
The warrants must be approved by a judge and are permitted in limited circumstances.
As of April 1, the Justice Department had obtained such warrants under the USA Patriot Act 47 times for searches and 14 times for property seizures. Extensions ranging from one day to 90 days have been obtained 248 times.
Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo said the Otter amendment "would have a devastating effect on the United States' ongoing efforts to detect and prevent terrorism, as well as to combat other serious crimes."
The amendment, approved Tuesday night, was attached to the annual spending bill for the Justice Department and other agencies, which passed the House yesterday. The bill moves on to the Senate, giving the Bush administration time to get it removed.
The Otter amendment would have no effect on secret search warrants obtained under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is aimed at agents of foreign powers such as spies and terrorists. The FISA law was also expanded and updated by the USA Patriot Act.
Notice that Mueller did not mention that the provision in question was one of those. All I've seen it used for is drug investigations.
So how does this hurt the war on terror if the government is still able to get secret warrants for foreign terrorists? Seems to me the Patriot Act simply allowed the feds to extend the sneak and peek method to ALL crime.
Also interesting that this article confirms DOJ HAS used this provision 14 times since April to seize private property without first notifying the owner! How can anyone support this particular provision and still claim to be conservative?
I think there are provisions worth keeping - for example, it makes sense in this day and age that an agency could get wiretap authority for all phones owned or used on a regular basis by a suspect with a blanket warrant.
That kind of undercuts the "unbridled authority" assertion doesn't it?
A dose of opportunism,however well meaning it may have been. It appears to me that more debate would be welcome, especially since the GOP is split 50-50 on it. To hell with the demoncrats, I'd at least like to hear GOPers whom I respect debate both sides of the Patriot Act.
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.