EMAIL
PRINT
20 COMMENTS
Share and save this post:
AlterNet Social Networks:
Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form
Also in Rights and Liberties
Pot Saved My Life, Mr. President
Jim Gilliam WhiteHouse2.org
Obama Takes Pot Legalization Question During Online Townhall
Sam Stein Huffington Post
Report: Global Executions Doubled in 2008, U.S. #4 in State Killing
Liliana Segura AlterNet
Earlier this month, the ACLU released a report taking stock of the USA PATRIOT Act, almost eight years after its passage. The study, titled "Reclaiming Patriotism," identifies key sections of the law that codified the most radical abuses of power under the Bush administration, interweaving stories of people who were unlawfully spied on, coerced, and intimidated through the PATRIOT Act's sweeping powers.
"More than seven years after its implementation, there is little evidence to demonstrate that the Patriot Act has made America more secure from terrorists," the report's authors write. "But there are many unfortunate examples that the government abused these authorities in ways that both violated the rights of innocent people and squandered precious security resources."
The ACLU report highlights three specific provisions of the PATRIOT Act that have led to unprecedented surveillance against Americans:
Section 215 -- which drastically broadens the kinds of information the government can demand under FISA to "any tangible thing" (while lowering the burden of proof to obtain an order). As the Washington Post explains, this measure "allows investigators probing terrorism to seek a suspect's records from third parties such as financial services and travel and telephone companies without notifying the suspect. The American Civil Liberties Union has criticized the provision, saying it violates the First Amendment rights of U.S. citizens."
Section 206 -- which grants the authority to use secret "roving wiretaps." "In the past, authorities had to seek court approval for each electronic device carried by a suspect, from a cellphone and a BlackBerry to a home computer," writes the Post, "But under the provision, one warrant can cover all of those machines." "Unlike roving wiretaps authorized for criminal investigations," the ACLU explains, "section 206 does not require the order to identify either the communications device to be tapped nor the individual against whom the surveillance is directed, which is what gives section 206 the Kafkaesque moniker, the "John Doe roving wiretap provision."
Section 6001 -- or the "lone wolf" provision, which allows for secret FISA surveillance orders against people who have no connections to a terror group or foreign nation. "The government justified this provision by imagining a hypothetical "lone wolf," an international terrorist operating independently of any terrorist organization," explains the ACLU, "but there is little evidence to suggest this imaginary construct had any basis in reality."
All three provisions are set to expire on December 31st.
Yesterday, however, during an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller made it clear that he considers these PATRIOT Act provisions valuable tools in intelligence gathering and will pressure Congress to keep them past their expiration date.
Questioned by Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.) about the "three major provisions that will sunset in 2009" and which have proven to be "somewhat controversial" in the past, Mueller said, "My hope, quite obviously, is that they will be less controversial as they come up this time, because we have seen their use and have some track record with it."
He described provision 215 as "exceptionally helpful," saying that the FBI had used it 223 times between 2004 and 2007. He said that the roving wiretaps provision had been used 147 times, "and that also has eliminated a substantial amount of paperwork and, I would say, confusion in terms of the ability for us to maintain electronic surveillance on an individual."
As for the "lone wolf" provision, Mueller did not have figures to share. "While we have not -- there has not been a 'lone wolf,' so to speak, indicted," he said, but "that provision is tremendously helpful where we have difficulty showing a tie between a particular individual about whom we have information that he might be supporting terrorism -- or be a terrorist -- but we have difficulty in identifying the foreign power for which he is an agent."
Based on this theoretical, Mueller said the provision was "beneficial" and "should be reenacted."
Mueller said he had not yet had a chance to discuss the sunset provisions in the PATRIOT Act with the Obama Department of Justice -- "My hope is that the [DOJ] will support the re-enactment of all three" -- but given Obama's embrace of -- and the Democrats' utter capitulation to -- warrantless wiretapping last year, it may be an uphill fight to convince Congress to block the reauthorization of these PATRIOT Act provisions based on First Amendment concerns. But it's never too early to start trying. "Our lawmakers have, over time, built a massive surveillance mechanism bit by bit," Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office said upon releasing the ACLU report. "Now is the time take it apart, examine each piece and develop wiser policies."
At the hearing, Sen. Cardin urged Mueller to re-examine the provisions while there is still time. "There may need to be modifications -- not necessarily restrictions -- there may need to be a fine tuning of these provisions to make sure they're more effective and used as intended by Congress," he said.
"This issue is going to come up quicker than we think."
Tagged as: patriot act, fbi, first amendment, aclu, department of justice, warrantless wiretapping, robert mueller, caroline fredrickson, benjamin l. cardin, roving wiretaps, sunset provisions, lone wolf provision
Liliana Segura is a staff writer and editor of AlterNet's Rights and Liberties and War on Iraq Special Coverage.
No comments:
Post a Comment