An Unconstitutional Approach to National Security i

The Patriot Act:

An Unconstitutional Approach to National Security

Evelyn Freeman

American Government

Dr. Martin

February 18, 2010

 An Unconstitutional Approach to National Security 1

The Patriot Act: An Unconstitutional Approach to National Security

The September 11, 2001 terror attacks brought forth many safeguards regarding our

National Security; most notably the signing of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 on October 26 of that

same year. Rushed through congress at “speed of light” proportions, the purpose of the Patriot

Act is to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law

enforcement investigatory tools” (http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/patriot). “The new law

greatly expanded the powers of FISA. It authorized the FBI to gather domestic intelligence. It

enabled the CIA to influence FBI surveillance and to obtain evidence gathered by federal grand

juries and FBI criminal wiretaps. The FBI also gained speedy access to medical, financial,

mental health, and academic records. The bill strengthened the ability of the Treasury

Department to fight money laundering. It authorized the Treasury Department to build up its

financial intelligence gathering system and to share its data with the CIA” (Gottfried, Homeland

Security Versus Constitutional Rights, 2003). However, in the race to sign, did Congress fail to

realize the negative impact the Patriot Act would have on our constitutional rights? While I

wholeheartedly support enhanced security measures that protect American citizens from terrorist

activity, I take issue with any law that interferes with the Constitutional rights established by our

forefathers.

During a judiciary committee hearing on September 23, 2009, a member of the Justice

Department; Assistant Attorney General David Kris, stated that “the law allows, and the courts

have held, that investigators can wiretap a suspect based on a specific description of that

suspect’s activities, even if investigators don’t know his name” (York, 2009). This element of the
 An Unconstitutional Approach to National Security 2

new law is fairly acceptable to most but even in its common sense approach to counter terrorism

measures, Senator Al Franken expressed concerns, reading aloud the Fourth Amendment; “The

right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable

searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause

supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the

persons or things to be seized” (York, 2009).

Additionally, Americans are concerned how much of the collected intelligence is being

withheld from the public. Many resorting to extreme measures, referred to as “Patriot Act

Hysteria.” Examples of this include the Pennsylvania librarian who destroyed book and internet

usage records of library patrons for fear that one day the government would demand the

information to be turned over to intelligence officials. Her philosophy is that if she has no

records, she can’t turn anything over. Other expressions of outrage were more subtly conveyed;

the Electronic Information Privacy Center made their position known by posting the following

statement on their website, “The Fourth Amendment: 1789-2001” (MacDonald, Straight Talk on

Homeland Security, 2003).

Essentially, the Patriot Act will continue to safeguard our country’s well-being. The

challenge is in the restoration of constitutional rights that this law impedes on. I tend to agree

with the following statement found on www.reformthepatriotact.org; “On February 28, 2010,

three provisions of the Patriot Act will sunset. This is the perfect opportunity for Congress to

examine all of our surveillance laws and amend those that have been found unconstitutional or
 An Unconstitutional Approach to National Security 3

have been abused to collect information on innocent people, including last year's changes to the

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Attorney General Guidelines (AGGs)”

(ReformthePatriotAct.org, 2010). Even this may not remedy all issues with the law; however, it

is certainly a step in the right direction.

 An Unconstitutional Approach to National Security 3

References

Gottfried, T. (2003). Homeland Security Versus Constitutional Rights

MacDonald, H. (2003). Are Privacy Rights Being Violated? Straight Talk on Homeland Security,

City Journal, Summer 2003.

York, B. (2009, October 2). Amid Terror Threat, Dems chip away at Patriot Act

www.washingtonexaminer.com. Retrieved February 17 2010 from,

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics

Fincen.gov (2009). Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. Retrieved February 17, 2009 from,

http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/patriot

ReformthePatriotAct.org (2010). Retrieved February 17, 2010 from,

http://www.reformthepatriotact.org