But whofs to say that this attack could not have been prevented? What could we have done? What type of intelligence would have to be acquired as a protective measure? The Government grasped this bull by the horns by instituting the Uniting and Securing America by Provide Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, or USA PATRIOT Act. Though this bill shreds independence and privacy, it was passed by a huge margin. America had not seen the bill not to mention had time to review the 326-page document. Purposeful or not, has the government used the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01 to watch over the people of the United States? Has the PATRIOT Act given the federal government too much power? Is Americafs privacy at stake?

Terrorism is defined in the US by the Code of Federal Regulations as: g...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian populatio

Notice is crucial to keep the governmentfs authority in check. This forces the authorities to operate in the open, and allows the subjects of a search to protect their Forth Amendment rights. For instance, if there are any irregularities in a warrant, such as the fact that the police are exceeding the scope of the search (i.e. rifling through dresser drawers in order to find a stolen car), or the fact that the police are at the wrong address, the property owner can defend his or her rights. This new gsneak and peekh power given to the authorities can be used in normal criminal investigations; which has nothing to do with fighting terrorism. But fighting terrorism is what has given authorities this new power.

Title III, which requires probable cause, a high level of legal standard to meet, from a judge for real-time interception of the content of voice and data communications, has been altered. No longer are high legal standards necessary to obtain a wiretap on communications. Standards have been lowered since the inception of the USAPA.

International terrorism includes violent acts threatening human life that are in violation of criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a crime if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts are often intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnaping. International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which the perpetrations operate or seek asylum.

This will be the saving grace for the congressional committee, for after the expiration of these provisions will open a window for jurisdictional review. December 31, 2005, after they expire, Congress will review how these and other provisions were enforced, and then decide the fate of these provisions.

For example, legislators make a law stating it unlawful to protest. Being a liberal who believes America should not go to war, you and some fellow peers hit the streets with picket signs. A police officer (of the executive branch) approaches your party, states what law you are violating, and arrests each one of you. After spending th night in jail, you are put before a judge (of the judicial branch), tried, and sentenced. This is how the three branches of our government work in unison. The way it was meant to be.

Sec. 223. Civil Liability For Certain Unauthorized Disclosures.

gNow here is where my caution in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks and my concerns over the reach of the anti-terrorism bill come together. To the extent that the expansive new immigration powers that the bill grants to the Attorney General are subject to abuse, who do we think that is most likely to bear the brunt of the abuse? It won't be immigrants from Ireland. It won't be immigrants from El Salvador or Nicaragua. It won't even be immigrants from Haiti or Africa. It will be immigrants from Arab, Muslim and South Asian countries. In the wake of these terrible events out government has been given vast new powers and they may fall most heavily on a minority of our population who already feel particularly acutely the pain of this disaster.h- Senator Russ Feingold, Statement on the Anti-Terrorism Bill (Oct. 25, 2002)

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, was passed in 1978. It allows a secret court to engage in surveillance on any foreign individual, gan agent of foreign powerh as defined in the act. Surveillance under FISA is permitted based on finding probable cause that a target is indeed a foreign power, irrespective of whether the target is suspected of criminal activity. Americans can become subject to this surveillance if probable cause is evident and it is believed that the indi

Some topics in this essay:
Patriot Act, Chief Justice, CFR Section, PATRIOT Act, Anarchist Cookbookfs, Forth Amendment, Surveillance FISA, Terrorism Act, Pen Register, Patriot Actsfs, patriot act, law enforcement, foreign intelligence, probable cause, executive branch, student information, electronic communications, foreign intelligence surveillance, uniting securing america, obstruct terrorism, terrorism act, checks balances, tools required intercept, appropriate tools required, intercept obstruct terrorism,