The USA Patriot Act Should be Amended

Every sane individual would agree with the assertion that what occurred on September 11, 2001 is indeed a tragedy for the American public. With this grief came the awareness and fear that terrorism has become a global dilemma. In line with such events, the US government led by President George W. Bush Jr. initiated an all out war against terrorism (global war on terror). The latter called for measures within and outside the United States that would supposedly crack down on terrorist groups and safeguard national security (Ahmed, 268).The main legislative measure employed is through the USA Patriot Act. The said Act extended the powers of U. S. law enforcement agencies for the mentioned purpose of conquering terrorism domestically and abroad. For example, the act increases the ability of law enforcement agencies in terms of surveillances (electronic, medical, immigration or financial records et cetera). As the Max Brenn reports, the USA Patriot Act:â€Å"†¦furthered foreign inte lligence gathering within the United States; expanded the authority of the US Secretary of Treasury to regulate financial transactions involving foreign entities; and permitted a high level of discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts. † (Brenn, 2007) The term â€Å"domestic terrorism† was also included in the definition of terrorism in the said Patriot Act, this means that the exercise of authority of law enforcement agencies covered a larger scope of activities.This paper asserts that the US Patriot Act should be amended due to its vague policies, the overpower it gives governmental agencies (i. e. the SNL), and the incompatibility of some of its provisions with the American constitution. Further, it must be noted that despite being amended last 2006, a lot of provisions (even those that are permanently stipulated) continue to violate civil liberties; with at least two provisions of the said act already being deemed to be unconstitutional.Moreover, the USA Patriot act as it is does not meet the urgency it had in 2001, as such it order to be in line with its purpose, it must be amended in accordance to the needs of our time. First, it has been argued that the said law infringes the right of individuals in terms of privacy as well as due process as well as giving too much power to the FBI, CSI etc. This is exemplified by the provisions in the Patriot act that allows for delayed if not with held search warrants.This goes to say that law enforcement officers have the authorization to conduct â€Å"sneak and peek† searches, wherein the owner or person concerned are not given notice nor is asked for permission regarding a search. Moreover it is the case that the NSLs (National Security Letters) are deemed to be used to acquire documents including telephone, email, financial and even library records (all of which are deemed as private) without the proper ap proval of a judicial court.It is further the case that most of the public records which the Federal Bureau of Investigations gains access too are supposed to be covered by the fourth amendment of the constitution and not to mention governed by client-company/institutional/professional privilege. Further, in support of the argument that the Patriot Act infringes civil liberties, we may review the current rulings of certain courts. Take for example, last September 6, 2007 the rewritten Patriot Act was held by U. S. District Judge Victor Marrero as offensive to the fundamental principles upheld by our constitution.A more current blow to the said law is the ruling of a federal judge that at least two provisions of the Patriot act are unconstitutional last September 26, 2007. This is again with regards to the warrantless searches and acquisition of records through the NSL which are in direct violation of the fourth amendment. The constitution is the primary source of the laws that govern s the land. In its current state, some aspects of the Patriot Act are contrary to the stipulations of the constitution.As such, there is a need to amend the Act otherwise, it would be nullified for not coinciding with the things that are upheld and safeguarded by the constitution. A lot of states have already agreed that the legislature contradicts with the fundamental principles of the constitution, one of this states is Montana (Graham-Felsen, 2005). The following are specific parts of the constitution that the Patriot Act needs to take into consideration and uphold at all times. In order for this to happen, the law would have to be amended.Aside from the fourth amendment, the Patriot act also needs to be amended in order to uphold the sixth amendment of the US constitution which assures the right of individuals to proper judicial processes. The USA Patriot Act warrants the use of shady courts in the sense that people suspected of terrorist activities despite lack of sufficient ev idence are tried without due presence of outside juries and proper documentation open to public scrutiny. This directly violates the 6th amendment because it allows underground processing of suspects.There is also reason to believe that US citizens are subjected to surveillance based on their religion and other affiliations, a direct violation of one’s right to self-determination. This is through the authority given to law enforcement agencies to tap into records of individuals without enough probable cause (ACLU, 2007). Further, Americans and immigrants are subjected to unconstitutional investigations and interrogations even if there is insufficient proof of these persons being actual threats to national security.There are inconveniences that occur today that manifest the extent to which the Patriot Act is shown to be a hindrance rather than a protection of national security. This can be seen through the incidents reported wherein American citizens are forced to delay flight s due to their inclusion to the no fly list by merely bearing the same name as a person suspected by the FBI or Homeland Security. One of the worst incidents perhaps is the wrongful accusation of Brandon Mayfield; whose fingerprints were mistakenly matched with the prints found in the Madrid Train Bombings of 2004 (Molina, 2007).Nonetheless, these faulty aspects of the Act can be amended to remove the errors it possesses. We cannot deny that there is indeed a need to safeguard our national security in order for us to live; rights do not function in a vacuum. There are certain conditions that have to be met in order for us to practice the liberties we love and cherish. The USA Patriot act and its rigidity is the right legislative course of action in 2001, its effectiveness can be improved to fit our society’s post-9/11 scenario.Certain provisions like those that continue to override the rights of the people need to be further amended to suit the constitutional system of our co untry. Some of the provisions are indeed too drastic and need to be re-evaluated and if necessary repealed; however some of the contents of the said Act do address the need to protect our land from terrorism. It must once again be clarified that even if the author deems that some provisions should be repealed, it does not necessarily follow the law in its entirety should be abolished.Specifically, the US congress could start by setting the limits to the use of NSLs by the FBI. Truly this aspect of the Patriot Act has been proven to be problematic. According to CNN. com, the White House itself expressed its concern regarding this misuse of powers last March 2007 which the FBI director at that time claim responsibility for (Arena & Quijano, 2007). In addition the reauthorization of the Patriot Act includes new policies that once again contain vague and ambiguous terms like, â€Å"an offense against the United States† and â€Å"reasonable grounds†.Indeed the latter would be significant in the sense that the said law warrants also the forming of a secret/special police force are given power to arrest and keep out people at their own discretion in lieu of a â€Å"special event of national significance† present (Roberts, 2006). The latter again is left undefined. These limitations, and the necessary provisions that safeguard the rights of the people, within reason, would be resolved through an amendment of the USA Patriot Act. The law needs to adapt to the necessity of the time on which it is suppose to serve its purpose.The aforementioned are samples of the provisions of which our congress could start reviewing and amending. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would regain its fullest meaning if and only if, we accept the need to safeguard, first and foremost, this country. Works Cited Ahmed, Nafeez M. The War on Freedom: How and Why America was Attacked September 11, 2001. CA: Tree of Life Publications, 2002 Arena, Kelli and Quijano, E laine. â€Å"Audit: FBI's Patriot Act snooping broke rules. † CNN. com. March 9, 2007. Accessed 5 October 2007 . Brenn, Max. â€Å"Sections of the Patriot Act Unconstitutional- Judge. † Efluxmedia. September 7, 2007. accessed October 8, 2007 at Graham-Felsen, Sam. â€Å"Sweet Victory: Montana Acts Patriotic. † The Nation. April 8, 2005. accessed 6 October 2007 . Molina, Mike R. â€Å"Federal judge rules Patriot Act search, surveillance provisions unconstitutional. † Paperchase news burst.Jurist; Legal News and Research. September 26, 2007. accessed 6 October 2007 . Roberts, Paul Craig. â€Å"Unfathomed Dangers in PATRIOT Act Reauthorization. † Anti-War. com. January 24, 2006. accessed 3 October 2007 at . â€Å"Federal Court Strikes Down Patriot Act Search and Surveillance Provisions. † American Civil Liberties Union. September 27, 2007. Date accessed 7 October 2007 < http://www. aclu. org/safefree/patriot/31989prs20070927. html>.