The Pros And Cons Of The Patriot Act

1524 Words4 Pages

One of the main grievances of the Patriot Act is that “its powers are too broad or open to misuse” (“The Patriot Act”), which has allowed it to “become a common tactic in cases that have nothing to do with national security” (“Surprise! Controversial Patriot”). Julian Sanchez, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, claims that “the Patriot Act is not really a ‘tool’; it 's a toolbox; and the debate currently unfolding… is not over whether to take the box away; it 's about whether and how particular tools can be” implemented (“The Patriot Act”). One main provision, or tool, called into question is Section 213, which allows for ‘sneak and peek’ search warrants, which “let authorities search a home or business without immediately notifying the …show more content…

One group at the forefront of the fight against the legislation is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). It is a non-profit organization headquartered in New York City since 1920, with over 500,000 members and nearly 200 attorneys. The mission of the ACLU is to be the “nation’s guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone” (“About ACLU”). Two of the main rights the organization is involved in protecting are the First Amendment freedoms (speech, petition, assembly, press, and religion) and the right to privacy. In 2004, the ACLU “filed a lawsuit on behalf of an unidentified Internet service provider challenging the FBI’s use of a type of administrative subpoena known as a national security letter” (Eggen). These National Security Letters (NSLs) give government intelligence agencies the power to force companies to disclose customer records, whether it be banks, Internet service providers, or cellular companies. In this case of Doe v. Gonzales, Judge Victor Marrero of the Southern District of New York ruled that the NSL provision of the Patriot Act is unconstitutional because it “effectively bars or substantially deters any judicial challenge and violates free-speech rights by imposing permanent silence on targeted companies” (Eggen). ACLU lawyer, Ann Beeson, claims that this judgment “is a wholesale refutation of the administration’s use of excessive secrecy and unbridled power under the Patriot Act” (Eggen). In addition to this landmark court case, the ACLU has played a leading role in the fight against NSA bulk surveillance. After a secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) order was disclosed in 2013 asking a Verizon subsidiary to provide details of every call placed during a period of three months,

Open Document