Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those associated with authors plus don’t necessarily reflect the views of LawTeacher.
The USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act) was established after 11, 2001 (9/11) when terrorists attacked the United States september.
The Patriot Act has raised many concerns about whether or not it infringes on the civil liberties of those for this nation. Looking back ever sold, our past presidents developed laws that were the stone that is stepping the ideas that developed the Patriot Act. The government’s job is to protect the people, nonetheless it has a bigger job which can be to safeguard the country. This has raised issues that are many the Patriot Act and whether or otherwise not it really is more detrimental to us than it is helpful. In relation to the Patriot Act and just how it deprives those accused under https://essaywritersite.com/write-my-paper-for-me it of Constitutional rights, the American people should really be focused on 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 must I say reality check for the united states. The united states has some of the very sophisticated counter intelligence in the field but was unable to prevent such a tragedy. Why didn’t it is seen by them coming? Plenty of thing will be different today if that question could half been answered prior to 9/11.
This act was compiled from two documents, the Provide Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (PATRIOT) through the homely house of Representatives (House) therefore the Uniting and Strengthening American (USA) Act through the Senate, was merged together creating the Patriot Act. Based on Lemieux, previous developed laws created by previous presidents to solve conflicts were like the Patriot Act they simply had different names Lemieux, M. (n.d.). History of the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved 9, 2011, from http://www.constitutiondenied.com/Media/History-Patriot-Act.pdf april. The Aliens and Sedition Act of 1798 was created through the war with France considering that the US was afraid for the country and the people and wished to make sure the enemy did not sleep amongst us. Using this power the president managed to have anyone who was considered to be a threat to your government would 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. During World War II, 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.). History of the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved 9, 2011, from http://www.constitutiondenied.com/Media/History-Patriot-Act.pdf april. They are the stone that is stepping the development of the Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act has been around since as a reply into the tragic events of 9/11. The balance that could 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 power to federal authorities. Eventually after 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 only senator to vote contrary to the Patriot Act. Although the Patriot Act failed to come right into existence until after 9/11, it can have roots in earlier legislation. On April 25, 1996, President Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act into law. The bill with this statutory law was introduced following the Oklahoma City Bombing. The most important provision associated with the act managed to get illegal to give “material support” to your organization banned because of the state dept.. The bill was greatly criticized by Republicans for granting power that is too much authorities. The balance had to undergo major modifications before it was passed in 1996. The bill that ended up law that is becoming said to be a “watered down version” of this original that President Clinton wanted passed. Strangely enough, it had been this act which was broadened and revamped to create the Patriot Act (Creative Commons, n.d.).
Since becoming law, the Patriot Act happens to be highly criticized if you are 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 plus in violation associated with the First and Fifth Amendments. Another criticism of the Patriot Act is the fact that it generally does not guarantee enough oversight to make sure that those who are given power by the act try not to misuse it. On March 9, 2006 President Bush signed the Patriot Act Reauthorization, but attached a statement that is signing which he said which he would ignore specific mandates printed in the balance that could 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 regarding the Constitution which states that ‘Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives together with Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, however if not he shall return it.’ Alberto Gonzales and President Bush both ignored the letters and not responded. Their argument was that the president could not change legislation that were passed by Congress and say which he would ignore part of it that he failed to agree with. On December 10, 2007, an appeals court upheld the 2004 ruling that areas of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional. 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 unearthed that certain components of the act were too vague. They concluded that if the law was worded in a manner that the average person could not understand, then the average person would not determine if they certainly were committing a crime (Creative Commons, n.d.).
Even though many genuinely believe that our threat that is terrorist from countries is fantastic, there is the fear of terrorist attacks from the US by a unique citizens. The Oklahoma City Bombing is a example that is tragic. In some instances, there is certainly a necessity for the government to suspect an American citizen and do surveillance to guard the united states from another tragedy that is such. The federal government happens to be espionage that is doing for extended than many people think. It isn’t a practice that is new however with the technology we now have today, it is easier for authorities to collect intelligence. Even though they have this technology at their disposal that doesn’t imply that the Constitution could be ignored in the name of protecting the US.
An example for the Patriot Act getting used this kind of a way is within the case of Jose Padilla.
He had been a Puerto Rican born citizen who later inside the life converted to Islam. He traveled throughout the Middle East and allegedly plotted with al Qaeda terrorists to detonate a “dirty bomb” in a US city. As soon while he stepped off a plane in the us he had been detained. The Bush Administration claimed though he was an American citizen because he had been deemed an “enemy combatant” by the president that he could be detained even. He had been then held in a brig that is military three and a half years and was allegedly subjected to torture at the hands of US officials attempting to elicit information from him. At that moment, he was not faced with any crimes even though it was said there clearly was evidence that is overwhelming him. He had been also cut off from all communication together with attorney and family(Martinez, 2007).