Thesis Statement
The PATRIOT Act analysis will tell if the Act was written with genuine interest of the US citizens or it was written with the aim of stripping off our rights that are taken for granted by many individuals.
Body
The USA PATRIOT Act was new legislation that was formed by the Government agencies and the public to respond to the growing fears of an attack that they had during the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks. The USA PATRIOT acronym stands for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”. The Bill was meant for implementing policies and plans with the aim of preventing a terrorist attack on our country in the near future. The Bill was also intended for the implementation of policies and plans for our citizens and interests throughout the globe (USA PATRIOT Act, 2017). There exist some controversial provisions in the power of conducting seizures and searches with the absence of “probable cause”, the gathering and interception of private communication involving text messages, email and voice call as well as the indefinite detention of terrorists who are suspected. It enabled easy access to an individual`s medical and financial records and fewer restrictions are involved in accessing court documents.
The PATRIOT Act was signed by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001, and the act was made a necessity for keeping us safe from attacks that may occur in the future. However, there was an emergence of some concerns where some civil liberties were ignored by the Act. The law has been altered time and again since it was enacted.
According to McCarthy (2002), the Act is divided into nine categories namely surveillance, prevention of terrorism by anti-money laundering practices, improved intelligence, domestic security against terrorism, putting away judicial obstacles to investigation, border security, victims of terrorism compensation, establishment of criminal law of terrorism and terrorism classification as criminal offense. The surveillance provision has particularly brought problems regarding rights. Restrictions were specifically eased to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and allowed surveillance to be conducted more freely by the government (Kerr, 2002)
During this time internal conflicts between the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) which disrupted the flow of information. The commercial planes were easily taken control of by hijackers with box cutters which raised concern and revealed to the world how easy it was to bypass our security measures. The PATRIOT Act was aimed at enhancing security for protecting us against these threats but it has however been criticized since it overhauled procedures of investigation that threatened the American citizens` privacy (Gouvin, 2003)
The approval of the PATRIOT Act led to the removal of the requirement of ” probable cause” by the Bush administration that was established by the Smith Act of 1940 for obtaining a search warrant. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was allowed to arrest individuals who had no warrant and detained them indefinitely by pressing no charge against them. Section 215(d) of the PATRIOT Act suppresses information to release about the government`s investigation regarding the government`s issuance of mandatory gag orders. It has been named the “secrecy clause” and has prevented individuals from holding the government accountable for its deeds. Section 215(d) of the PATRIOT Act has given authority to the FBI to prevent the public from accessing information from any library database. It has ignored civil liberties by operating in the shadows which are not affected by the scrutiny of the law or public.
Section 213 has allowed the government to carry out a “sneak and peak” seizures and search without probable cause where the searches were done on ordinary US citizens who committed crimes not related to terrorism. Title II allows the government to collect foreign intelligence information on both Americans and non-American citizens. It resulted in the removal of legal barriers between the operations of surveillance and criminal investigations and removed the government`s requirement for proving that the target is not the US. Title III was established for the purpose of preventing terrorists from getting funding for their operations. It enabled the finding and prosecution of money launders by law enforcers and expanded the instruments for recording keeping in the institutions. It allowed for seizing of individuals` property and money for any reason and made it mandatory for reporting of suspicious transactions by financial institutions.
Title IV gave vast investigative powers to INS and the United States Attorney General. New standards for conducting background checks, determining identities and visa eligibility were developed. Title V allowed paying rewards concerning collection and prevention of terrorist activities. Education information can be collected by the Attorney General from institutions if there is a likelihood of the records to contain information concerning the occurrence of terrorist action. Information given by any of educational institution in a case like this is termed immunity. National Security Letters (NSLs) are used by CIA and FBI and other departments for collecting records, data and information regarding certain individuals or organizations Title VII enables law enforcers to easily communicate across jurisdictions for protection of critical infrastructure. Changes in the definition of terrorism were made by Title VIII. Title IX dealt with the improvement of intelligence gathering and distribution to ascertain the efficient working of the agents. Title X enabled the creation of grants for first responders to fund instruments and training needed to prevent terrorism.
Conclusion
The PATRIOT Act consisted of both good and bad elements. In a way, it assisted in securing our borders and making it harder for our enemies to complete their goals against us. It allowed the shifting of the focus of concern by the Government from American Civil Liberties to untrue security sense by removing our privacy completely. The PATRIOT Act got praise from many individuals but immediately they read the details and saw the outcomes, they noted that it was used as a political weapon. The unconstitutional gang orders provided a little evidence of the misuse of authorities by the government but since the inaction of the PATRIOT Act, there is no or very little evidence that the government has done to keep our country safer (Whitehead & Aden, 2001)
Individuals who propose the PATRIOT Act argue that it is necessary to give some of our liberties for the Government to monitor everything in safety`s name. Individuals who oppose the PATRIOT Act say that it is not the right way for us to give up freedom for matters of security. The constitution says that it is the work of the government to protect our citizens and interests both from outside the country and from within.
References
Gouvin, E. J. (2003). Bringing out the big guns: the USA patriot act, money laundering, and the war on terrorism. Baylor L. Rev., 55, 955.
USA PATRIOT Act. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/USA-PATRIOT-Act
McCarthy, M. T. (2002). USA Patriot Act.
Whitehead, J. W., & Aden, S. H. (2001). Forfeiting enduring freedom for homeland security: A constitutional analysis of the USA Patriot Act and the Justice Department's anti-terrorism initiatives. Am. UL Rev., 51, 1081.
Kerr, O. S. (2002). Internet surveillance law after the USA Patriot Act: The big brother that isn't. Nw. UL Rev., 97, 607.
5
k.melo7
USAPATRIOTACT.docx
0
