Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are the ones associated with authors and don’t 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 custom essay order many concerns about whether or not it infringes from the civil liberties of those for this nation. Looking back of all time, our past presidents developed laws which were the stone that is stepping the ideas that created the Patriot Act. The government’s job is to protect the people, however it has a more substantial job that will be to protect the country. This has raised many issues involving the Patriot Act and whether or otherwise not it is more detrimental to us than it really is helpful. Pertaining to the Patriot Act and exactly how it deprives those accused under it of Constitutional rights, the American people should be worried about exactly how much power our government has when developing laws governing our civil liberties.
On 11, 2001 the United States (US) experienced the unthinkable when terrorists attacked the country on its own soil september. It was a serious eye opener or should I say reality check for the US. The US has many of the very counter that is sophisticated in the world but was not able to prevent such a tragedy. Why didn’t it is seen by them coming? Lots of thing will be different today if that question could half been answered ahead of 9/11.
This act was compiled from two documents, the Provide Appropriate Tools expected to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (PATRIOT) from the House of Representatives (House) as well as the Uniting and Strengthening American (USA) Act through the Senate, was merged together creating the Patriot Act. In accordance with Lemieux, previous developed laws created by previous presidents to resolve conflicts were like the Patriot Act they simply had different names Lemieux, M. (n.d.). History of the united states Patriot Act. Retrieved April 9, 2011, from http://www.constitutiondenied.com/Media/History-Patriot-Act.pdf. The Aliens and Sedition Act of 1798 was created during the pugilative war with France considering that the US was afraid when it comes to country together with people and wanted to make sure the enemy did not sleep amongst us. With this power the president surely could have anyone who was thought to be a threat to your government will be arrested and deported. Throughout the Civil War the president suspended Habeas Corpus for the safety advantages of the world, giving the government the ability to imprison someone without sufficient evidence. The President ordered over 10,000 American citizens that had not shown any disloyalty to the United States into confinement camps simply because they were of Japanese descent Lemieux, M. (n.d.) during World War II. History of the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved April 9, 2011, from http://www.constitutiondenied.com/Media/History-Patriot-Act.pdf. They are the stone that is stepping the introduction of the Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act came into existence as an answer to your tragic events of 9/11. The balance that will come to be referred to as Patriot Act was introduced to Congress just days after 9/11. It had been revised because of concerns from many congressmen that the bill allowed for too broad of a scope of power to federal authorities. Eventually after the bill was revised and reintroduced, Congress passed it with little to no opposition on 26, 2001 october. Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI), would up being the senator that is only vote against the Patriot Act. Even though the Patriot Act failed to enter into existence until after 9/11, it does have roots in earlier legislation. On April 25, 1996, President Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act into law. The balance for this statutory law was introduced following the Oklahoma City Bombing. The most important provision for the act managed to make it illegal to provide “material support” to your organization banned by the state dept.. The bill was greatly criticized by Republicans for granting power that is too much authorities. The bill needed to undergo major modifications before it had been passed in 1996. The bill that wound up law that is becoming said to be a “watered down version” for the original that President Clinton wanted passed. Strangely enough, it absolutely was this act that was broadened and revamped to generate the Patriot Act (Creative Commons, n.d.).
Since becoming law, the Patriot Act has been highly criticized for being extremely broad and too open for interpretation. In 2004, a judge ruled that parts of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional because they were too vague as well as in violation associated with First and Fifth Amendments. Another criticism regarding the Patriot Act is that it generally does not guarantee enough oversight to make sure those that are given power because of the act do not misuse it. On March 9, 2006 President Bush signed the Patriot Act Reauthorization, but attached a statement that is signing that he said that he would ignore specific mandates printed in the balance that will give more judicial and Congressional oversight to agencies authorized utilization 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 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 the President regarding the 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 would ignore part of it that he did not agree with. 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 found that certain parts of the act were too vague. They concluded that then the average person would not know if they were committing a crime (Creative Commons, n.d.) if the law was worded in a way that the average person could not understand,.
Even though many genuinely believe that our threat that is terrorist from countries is fantastic, there’s also the fear of terrorist attacks from the US by its very own citizens. The Oklahoma City Bombing is a tragic example. In some instances, there clearly was a necessity when it comes to government to suspect an American citizen and do surveillance to guard the united states from another such tragedy. The federal government has been espionage that is doing for longer than a lot of people think. It is not a new practice, however with the technology we have today, it is easier for authorities to collect intelligence. And even though they will have this technology at their disposal that doesn’t mean that the Constitution can be ignored into the true name of protecting the united states.
One example of the Patriot Act being used this kind of a real way is within the case of Jose Padilla.
He was a Puerto Rican born citizen who later in the life changed into Islam. He traveled through the entire 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 an airplane in the United States he was detained. The Bush Administration claimed that he might be detained even though he was 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 . 5 years and was allegedly subjected to torture at the hands of US officials trying to elicit information from him. At that time, he had been not faced with any crimes even though it was said there clearly was overwhelming evidence against him. He had been also cut off from all communication together with family and attorney (Martinez, 2007).