Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are the ones of this authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of LawTeacher.
The USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act) was established after September 11, 2001 (9/11) when terrorists attacked the United States.
The Patriot Act has raised concerns that are many whether it infringes regarding the civil liberties of those for this nation. Looking back in history, our past presidents developed laws that were the stone that is stepping the ideas that developed the Patriot Act. The government’s job is always to protect the social people, but it has a more substantial job that is to safeguard the country. It has raised many issues involving the Patriot Act and whether or otherwise not it is more detrimental to us than it is helpful. The american people should be concerned with how much power our government has when developing laws governing our civil liberties in relation to the Patriot Act and how it deprives those accused under it of Constitutional rights.
On 11, 2001 the United States (US) experienced the unthinkable when terrorists attacked the country on its own soil september. It was a eye that is serious or can I say reality search for the usa. The united states has some of the very most sophisticated counter intelligence in the field but was struggling to prevent such a tragedy. Why didn’t they see it coming? Lots of thing could be today that is different that question could half been answered just before 9/11.
This act was compiled from two documents, the Provide Appropriate Tools expected to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (PATRIOT) through the homely house of Representatives (House) in addition to Uniting and Strengthening American (USA) Act from the Senate, was merged together creating the Patriot Act. Based on Lemieux, previous developed laws created by previous presidents to solve conflicts were much like the Patriot Act they simply had different names Lemieux, M. (n.d.). Reputation for the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved April 9, 2011, from http://www.constitutiondenied.com/Media/History-Patriot-Act.pdf. The Aliens and Sedition Act of 1798 was developed during the pugilative war with France because the US was afraid for the country while the people and wished to make sure the enemy would not sleep amongst us. With this power the president was able to have anyone who was considered to be a threat to the government could be arrested and deported. The president suspended Habeas Corpus for the safety benefits of the nation, giving the government the power to imprison someone without sufficient evidence during the Civil War. The President ordered over 10,000 American citizens that had not shown any disloyalty towards the united states of america into confinement camps because they were of Japanese descent Lemieux, M. (n.d.) during World War II. Reputation for the united states Patriot Act. Retrieved April 9, 2011, from http://www.constitutiondenied.com/Media/History-Patriot-Act.pdf. They are the stone that is stepping the development of the Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act came into existence as a response to your tragic events of 9/11. The bill that would come to be known as the Patriot Act was introduced to Congress just days after 9/11. It was revised because of concerns from many congressmen that the bill allowed for too broad of a scope of capacity to authorities that are federal. Eventually following the bill was revised and reintroduced, Congress passed it with little to no opposition on October 26, 2001. Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI), would up being the senator that is only vote contrary to the Patriot Act. Although the Patriot Act failed to enter into existence until after 9/11, it will have roots in earlier legislation. On 25, 1996, President Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act into law april. The bill with this statutory law was introduced following the Oklahoma City Bombing. The major provision associated with the act managed to make it illegal to deliver support that is“material to your organization banned because of the state dept.. The balance was greatly criticized by Republicans for granting a lot of capacity to authorities. The bill had to undergo modifications that are major it was passed in 1996. The bill that wound up becoming law was said to be a “watered down version” of this original that President Clinton wanted passed. Strangely enough, it had been this act that was revamped and broadened to create the Patriot Act (Creative Commons, n.d.).
The Patriot Act has been highly criticized for being extremely broad and too open for interpretation since becoming law. In 2004, a judge ruled that components of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional since they were too vague and in violation associated with First and Fifth Amendments. Another criticism regarding the Patriot Act is the fact that it generally does not guarantee enough oversight to make sure those who are given power because of the act try not to misuse it. On March 9, 2006 President Bush signed the Patriot Act Reauthorization, but attached a signing statement in that he said that he would ignore specific mandates written in the balance that could give more judicial and Congressional oversight to agencies authorized use of the act. The Attorney General at the time, requesting to have the administration rescind the signing statement since they do not have force of law in late March, letters were written to Alberto Gonzales. In those letters, they cited Article 1, Section 7 for the Constitution which states that ‘Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and also the Senate, shall, if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall send it back. before it become a Law, be presented to your President of this United States;’ Alberto Gonzales and President Bush both ignored the letters and not responded. Their argument was that the president could not change legislation that had been passed by Congress and say that he did not agree with that he would ignore part of it. On 10, 2007, an appeals court upheld the 2004 ruling that parts of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional december. The court stated that a statute must allow for a person of average intelligence to be able to read and understand the law in the ruling. They discovered that certain areas of the act were too vague. They determined that in the event that law was worded in a manner that the typical average person could not understand, then your average person wouldn’t normally determine if they were committing a crime (Creative Commons, n.d.).
While many believe that our terrorist threat from other countries is fantastic, additionally there is driving a car of terrorist attacks from the US by its own citizens. The Oklahoma City Bombing is a tragic example. In many cases, there is certainly a need when it comes to government to suspect an American citizen and do surveillance to guard the country from another tragedy that is such. The us government has been espionage that is doing for extended than many people think. It is really not a new practice, however with the technology we now have today, it really is easier for authorities to get intelligence. Despite the fact that they have this technology at their disposal that will not mean that the Constitution could be ignored into the true name of protecting the united states.
An example regarding the Patriot Act getting used this kind of a real way is in the case of Jose Padilla.
He had been a Puerto Rican born citizen who later inside the life changed into Islam. He traveled through the Middle East and allegedly plotted with al Qaeda terrorists to detonate a bomb” that is“dirty a US city. As soon while he stepped off a plane in the us he was detained. The Bush Administration claimed that he could possibly be detained despite the fact that he had been an American citizen because he previously been deemed an “enemy combatant” because of the president. He had been then held in a military brig for three and a half years and was allegedly subjected to torture as a result of US officials attempting to essay writers elicit information from him. During those times, he was not faced with any crimes although it was said there was clearly overwhelming evidence against him. He had been also take off from all communication together with family and attorney (Martinez, 2007).