USA PATRIOT Act Guide, Meaning , Facts, Information and Description
The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act, H.R 3162, S. 1510, Public Law 107-56) is a United States legislative law, enacted in response to the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks. The bill passed 98-1 in the United States Senate, and 356-66 in the United States House of Representatives; Senator Russ Feingold (Democrat, Wisconsin) cast the Senate's lone dissenting vote. President George W. Bush signed the bill into law on October 26, 2001. Assistant attorney general Viet D. Dinh was the chief architect of the act.
Domestic vs foreign law enforcement and surveillance
| Domestic Law Enforcement | Foreign Intelligence Surveillance |
| 1. Intercept Orders. Title III (named after the relevant section of the original legislation, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968) surveillance is a traditional wiretap that allows the police to bug rooms, listen to telephone conversations, or get content of electronic communications in real time.
(Courts do not treat unopened e-mail at ISPss as real-time communications.) |
1. FISA Intercept Orders.
|
| 2. Pen/Trap. Pen/Trap surveillance was based upon the physical wiring of the telephone system. It allowed law enforcement to obtain the telephone numbers of all calls made to or from a specific phone.
Prior to PATRIOT there had been debate about how this authority is to be applied in the Internet context. |
2. FISA Pen/Trap. Previous FISA pen/trap law required not only showing of relevance but also showing that the communications device had been used to contact an "agent of a foreign power." While this exceeds the showing under the ordinary pen/trap statute, such a showing had the function of protecting U.S. persons against FISA pen/trap surveillance. |
| 3. Physical search warrants Judicial finding of probable cause of criminality; return on warrant. Previously, agents were required at the time of the search or soon thereafter to notify person whose premises were searched that search occurred, usually by leaving copy of warrant. PATRIOT makes it easier to obtain surreptitious or "sneak-and-peek" warrants under which notice can be delayed. |
3. FISA Physical search warrants See FISA 50 USC §1822. PATRIOT extends duration of physical searches. Under previous FISA, Attorney General (without court order) could authorize physical searches for up to one year of premises used exclusively by a foreign power if unlikely that U.S. person will be searched; minimization required. A.G. could authorize such searches up to 45 days after judicial finding of probable cause that U.S. target is or is an agent of a foreign power; minimization required, and investigation may not be based solely on First Amendment-protected activities. |
| 4. Subpoenas for stored information. Many statutes authorize subpoenas; grand juries may issue subpoenas as well. EFF's main concern here has been for stored electronic information, including e-mail communications and subscriber or transactional records held by ISPs. Subpoenas in this area are governed by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). |
4. FISA subpoenas Previously, FISA authorized collection of business records in very limited situations, mainly records relating to common carriers, vehicles or travel, and only via court order. PATRIOT permits any "tangible things," including business records, to be obtained via a subpoena. |
Public opinion
According to a September 9, 2003 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll, 75% of Americans are not worried about the USA PATRIOT Act violating their civil rights.[1] Just 22% say the legislation goes "too far," while about the same number, 21%, say "not far enough." A plurality, 48%, says the Act is "about right."
According to recent polls, 52% of Americans report being concerned that their civil liberties are being infringed by the Bush administration's war on terrorism. [1]
Bernie Sanders (I-VT) with Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), John Conyers Jr (D-Mich.), C. L. Otter (R-Idaho), and Ron Paul (R-Texas) proposed an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations Bill of 2005 which would cut off funding to the Department of Justice for searches conducted under Section 215. The amendment failed to pass the House with a tie vote, 210–210. Although the original vote came down in favor of the amendment, the vote was held open and several House members were persuaded to change their votes. [1]
On April 9, 2004 the ACLU filed a lawsuit challenging the national security letter (NSL)[1] provisions of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act which allows the FBI to obtain customer records from phone and Internet companies in terrorism investigations. The ACLU successfully argued that phone companies and ISPs should be able to disclose receiving a subpoena from the FBI and it outweighs the FBI's need for secrecy in counter-terrorism investigations. No part of the Patriot Act was impacted.
This is an Article on USA PATRIOT Act. Page Contains Information, Facts Details or Explanation Guide About USA PATRIOT Act Challenges to limit the USA PATRIOT Act
United States Senate
On July 31, 2003, Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), introduced the "Protecting the Rights of Individuals Act" (S. 1552) [1]. This bill would revise several provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act to increase judicial review. For example, instead of PEN/Trap warrants to track Internet usage being based on the claims of law-enforcement, they would be based on "specific and articulable facts that reasonably indicate that a crime has been, is being, or will be committed, and that information likely to be obtained by such installation and use is relevant to the investigation of that crime." However, the Protecting the Rights of Individuals Act doesn't address the portion of Sec. 216 of the USA PATRIOT Act which allows unnamed-persons to be subject to a PEN/Trap warrant based on law-enforcement certifying that those individuals should have been named.United States House of Representatives
On September 24, 2003, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Co-Chair of the Progressive Caucus, introduced legislation into the US House of Representatives to repeal more than ten sections of the Act. The bill, titled the "Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act", looks to review certain sections of the USA PATRIOT Act, including those that authorize sneak and peek searches, warrantless library, medical, and financial record searches, and the detention and deportation of non-citizens without meaningful judicial review. Beyond the USA PATRIOT Act, the bill cements the fundamental right of Attorney/Client Privilege and restores transparency in the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security by revoking FOIA secrecy orders, along with other important provisions.American Civil Liberties Union
Main article: ACLU v. AshcroftAlleged abuses under the PATRIOT Act
Expiration and possible renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act
Sunset provisions
Under PATRIOT §224, several of the surveillance portions of
PATRIOT will expire on December 31, 2005.
Provisions that will expire
Permanant/non-expiring provisions
See also
Historical similarities to other laws
External links and references
Governmental
Other