In the wake of the terrorist
attacks on the World Trade Center, widespread fear enveloped the nation. In a supposed effort to streamline law
enforcement’s ability to monitor potential terrorists, proactively neutralize
threats, and give US citizens a renewed sense of security, President George W.
Bush signed The USA PATRIOT Act into law, on October 26, 2001. Officially named
the Uniting (and) Strengthening America (by) Providing Appropriate Tools
Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism Act, the law has sparked
heated debate over the violation of people’s 4th Amendment rights,
with multiple suits landing under the jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court.
This
blog explores the argument that the US Patriot Act, in implementation, is in
fact, not “patriotic.” Many believe that because of the autonomy granted
to law enforcement agencies by the Patriot Act, Americans have been forced to
give up an inordinate amount of privacy, and have their constitutionally
protected rights violated. At the center of the debate are millions of
Americans who have been unjustly profiled and discriminated against because of
their race, ethnicity and religion. While the US Justice Department
argues that the Patriot Act stipulates against racial profiling in the search
for potential terrorists, there is much evidence that suggests otherwise.
Thousands of Middle Eastern immigrants and Muslim Americans have been targeted
and detained illegally under the jurisdiction of the Patriot Act.
Another
group being singled out by the law are international students, as it expands the foreign student
tracking system referred to as the Student and Exchange Visitor Information
System (SEVIS). Foreign students and exchange visitors have been monitored
since 1996, but with the new provisions, it has become more difficult and
costly to obtain visas to study in America. One of the most controversial
implications of the Patriot Act as it relates to students, falls in the realm
engineering and vocational schools, some of which have considered limiting
research abilities for individuals based on the fear that some foreign students
could potentially use their knowledge to commit terrorist acts.
Three extremely controversial surveillance methods
used to gather information on suspicious individuals such as international
students are: the government's expansion of power over wiretapping, law
enforcement’s ability to invoke 'sneak and peek' warrants, and authorities’
increased ease of access to citizen's private records. Many argue that these
provisions of the Patriot Act violate the Fourth Amendment in multiple ways.
The controversial issue related to the expansion of searching records not only
violates the Fourth Amendment by failing to provide prior notice, but also the
First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech. Suspects who have been searched are
forbidden from telling others what has happened.
Yet another highly questionable method of obtaining
information about private individuals is through the use of National Security
Letters (NSL). Government agencies can issue an NSL to any corporation or
organization demanding the release of all records relating to an individual,
and prevent them from disclosing this to anyone by including a gag order in the
letter. In 2004, the US Supreme Court ruled that the gag order was a violation
of the recipient’s First Amendment rights, and questioned the legality of
Fourth Amendments rights relating to probable cause for warrants, and
unreasonable search and seizure practices.
A newer area of concern to the
government and the private sector is the potential that information housed on
computers might be vulnerable to security attacks, otherwise known as cyber
terrorism. Another concern was how networks that house information could be
compromised. If secure networks were compromised, criminals could gain access
to and manipulate vital information.
