CPT Public Witness

USA PATRIOT Act Background Materials

Public witnesses should be the outgrowth of informed decisions.  Groups should collect anaylisis and commentary pieces which provide a framework for action.   The Peacemaker Congress action used the following pieces which were included in background packets given to local media.

Analysis: The USA PATRIOT Act - An Overview

Commentary: Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas

The USA PATRIOT Act - An Overview

“Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools
Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”

The USA PATRIOT Act, crafted by Attorney General John Ashcroft, was rushed through Congress and signed into federal law by President Bush in the name of national security on October 26, 2001, just six weeks after 9/11, in a time of fear and great confusion. Few Congresspeople even read the 342-page document, yet it puts severe restrictions on the Bill of Rights.
On the surface, the act appears to help our government battle terrorism, yet the act actually attacks and criminalizes our basic rights to disagree with policies set by the government. The act is unpatriotic in that it opposes our country’s founding principles as listed in the Bill of Rights.

Amendment I: Freedom of Speech

• Contains an overly broad and vague definition of “domestic terrorism” that may be used against people exercising their right to dissent
• Opens the door to COINTELPRO operations to monitor and surveil religious and political groups without evidence of wrongdoing

The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The USAPA definition of terrorism extends well beyond attacks on innocent civilians. It criminalizes any act that would “appear to be intended … to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion” (USAPA Section 802). The USAPA could easily be used to interpret strikes, protests, or other forms of legitimate dissent supported by the First Amendment as “dangerous to human life”. It could be used to prevent the right to assemble peaceably.

Section 411 of the USAPA infringes on our First Amendment rights. It broadens the definition of activities that can be considered punishable for citizens and “deportable offenses” for noncitizens. For example, it deems soliciting funds for an organization that the government labels as terrorist as “engaging in a terrorist activity”. The government often defines such organizations without due process, using alleged “secret evidence”. Giving money to Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress would have been considered a criminal act by the USAPA if it were in effect during the Apartheid days of South Africa.

The USAPA uses Section 215 to allow the FBI to acquire lending and purchasing records from libraries and bookstores; government access to such records jeopardizes our free speech rights to read or recommend certain books.

Section 216 threatens free speech by authorizing the use of the “Carnivore” system, an electronic tracking system that is capable of capturing all forms of internet activity.

Amendment IV: Right to Privacy

• Allows FBI access to a person’s bank records, library use, bookstore purchases, and email upon “suspicion of terrorism.” Allows Pentagon access to high school students’ records.
• Allows the secretary of state to designate any group that has engaged in violence as “terrorist,” opening way to peaceful groups being so designated as the result of an action by an agent provocateur.
• Allows for “sneak and peak” of homes to be searched without being given notice or viewing of search warrant.

The Fourth Amendment states “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.”

Section 213 allows the government to do “sneak and peek” searches, or to search your home when no one is there! And they can delay notification of the search indefinitely.

USAPA Section 218 grants the Executive Branch the most far-reaching surveillance powers ever, effectively eroding separation of powers. Section 218 eliminates the need for the FBI to show “probable cause” before conducting secret searches. This means that if police involved in an investigation want to evade the Fourth Amendment, all they have to do is claim that there is a need to gather foreign intelligence as part of their investigation. If Ex-President Nixon had Section 218 at his disposal, Watergate would have been legal.

Amendment IV: Due Process

• Allows people to be held in detention indefinitely and denied communication with outsiders or judicial review. Can be tied to racial profiling to single out ethnic groups.

The Fifth Amendment states “No person shall be held to answer for a… crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

USAPA Section 412 gives the Attorney General broad powers to detain noncitizens; the Attorney General’s assertion of “reasonable grounds to believe” that noncitizens are engaged in activities that threaten national security, is grounds for the INS to detain them for seven days without charge. If charged, they are subject to mandatory detention. In this manner, the Attorney General and the INS are able to imprison noncitizens without “due process of law” – violating the Fifth Amendment

Amendment VI: Speedy and Public Trial

The Sixth Amendment states “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed… and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

USAPA Section 412 allows the Attorney General to keep from noncitizens why they were identified as “engaging in threatening activities”. This violates the right “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation”. Lengthy detention also violates the right to a speedy trial.

This handout is produced by American Friends Service Committee, adapted from Andersonville Neighbors for Peace’s guide to “How the ‘US Patriot’ Act is Unpatriotic.”   Visit www.chicagorights.org

Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003

The following primer on the Patriot Act is excerpted from remarks delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.

...The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'

That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.

So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act. The full name is the USA Patriot Anti-Terror Act, passed in the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Interestingly, and disturbingly, the document was written long before those attacks ever took place. If you believe the advertising, the Patriot Act serves us all by defending us against terrorist attacks, by casting a fine net to snare those who mean to do us harm. The Act itself is a huge sheaf of paper, written in that dense legalese so common to legislation. Attorney General John Ashcroft has been on a tour of American cities in the last month touting the Act before police organizations. He believes it is a vital and necessary weapon against terrorism.

I am not going to stand up here today and try to claim that the events of September 11 do not require a response from the American legal system. . . But I must now ask you my first question of the night, one I will repeat as we go on. What price security? How much can we give up before we become a country that is not America?

At bottom, at the end of the day, and when all the shouting and chest-beating is over, America is an idea... What is that idea? The idea is simple and stupendous simultaneously.

The idea that is America says you can go where you want, say what you want, think what you want, spend what and where you want, pray to whomever you want, or not pray at all, and the government cannot restrict your doing this unless you are demonstrably causing harm to a fellow citizen. Simple……and amazing. The document says we are gifted the unalienable right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." The substance of those rights are the freedoms I have listed, and all the others I have not named. That is the idea that is America. We are unique in all the world to have such concepts be an essential part of our founding.

If you murder the idea that is America, you have murdered America itself. You can keep all of our roads, our cities, our crops, our people, our armies - you can keep all that, but if you murder the fundamental idea that is America, you have murdered America itself in a way that ten thousand September 11ths could never do. No terrorist can end this country. No terrorist can destroy the ideals we hold dear. Only we can do that, we who are most comforted by that blanket of freedom, and I fear that we have begun to do so with the passage of this thing they call the Patriot Act.

There are hundreds and hundreds of sections to the Patriot Act. My personal favorite is Section 213. Legal scholars have dubbed this the "Sneak and Peek" provision. Section 213 of the Patriot Act gives authority to agents of the Federal government to enter your home, search your belongings, tap your phone, tap your computer so every keystroke and website and email is recorded. They can do this without getting a warrant, and without ever letting you know they were there.

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution reads as follows: "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."

But this is all supposed to be about going after terrorists, right? Why should terrorists have access to the protections of the Fourth Amendment? They key here is the definition of 'terrorist,' and the Patriot Act leaves that definition very, very vague.

Section 802 of the Act creates the federal crime of "domestic terrorism." Among other things, this section states that acts committed within the United States "dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws" can be considered acts of domestic terrorism if they "appear to be intended" to "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," or "to intimidate or coerce a civilian population." This provision applies to United States citizens, as well as aliens.

Ever been to a protest? A lot of protests are acts intended to attack or throw light upon a particular government policy. According to the nebulous definition of 'domestic terrorism' as espoused by Section 802 of the Patriot Act, such acts of dissent now fall under the definition of terrorism.

Nancy Chang of the Center for Constitutional Rights writes: "Vigorous protest activities, by their very nature, could be construed as acts that 'appear to be intended to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.' Further, clashes between demonstrators and police officers and acts of civil disobedience - even those that do not result in injuries and are entirely non-violent - could be construed as 'dangerous to human life' and in 'violation of the criminal laws.' Environmental activists, anti-globalization activists, and anti-abortion activists who use direct action to further their political agendas are particularly vulnerable to prosecution as 'domestic terrorists.'"

There is more. Section 411 of the Patriot Act purportedly defines foreign terrorist organizations. However, as the ACLU points out, this provision "permits designation of foreign and domestic groups," since the provision defines these groups as "any political, social or other similar group who publicly endorse acts of terrorism" - which, of course, under the Section 802, could mean lawful protest.

I'll give you one quick example. On December 6, 2001, Attorney General Ashcroft stood before Congress to testify about the Patriot Act. In his opening statements, he said, "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty; my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists -- for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve."

Therefore, according to Mr. Ashcroft, if you criticize the Patriot Act you are, under section 411, publicly endorsing terrorist activity by "frightening people with phantoms of lost liberty." If you criticize the Patriot Act publicly, you are also potentially in violation of section 802.

Opportunities for abuse of these broad new powers are immense, and that is the rub. Of course there must be a legal response to the crimes committed against us on September 11. But the Patriot Act goes much, much too far. The Patriot Act asks us to completely surrender that mistrust of government that caused us to make this country in the first place, that mistrust of government that is essential to our standing as free citizens. The Patriot Act asks us to believe that no government official would ever, ever, ever abuse these sweeping powers in the pursuit of a political agenda. Why worry? That's never happened before……

The Patriot Act asks us to throw over the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, fourteenth and fifteenth amendments to the constitution, period.

The Patriot Act allows the government to detain, indefinitely and without access to an attorney or a trial by jury, anyone they deem to be a terrorist.

That definition is left to the sole discretion of the federal government, and to John Ashcroft. That definition, as we have already seen, can be applied to citizen and non-citizen alike. It can apply to you, and to me. As we sit here, there are well over 1,000 people sitting in prisons without access to an attorney or a jury trial. There is no time limit on their detention. Some of them may very well be terrorists that mean to do us harm. Many others, however, are people who fit a preconceived notion of what a threatening person may be.

In an Associated Press article from last Sunday, said Dan Dodson, a spokesman for the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, said, "Within six months of passing the Patriot Act, the Justice Department was conducting seminars on how to stretch the new wiretapping provisions to extend them beyond terror cases. They say they want the Patriot Act to fight terrorism, then, within six months, they are teaching their people how to use it on ordinary citizens."
Clearly, the powers of the Patriot Act are already being abused.

September 11 happened. There must be a response. I submit to you today that the Patriot Act is the wrong response, a dangerous response, a response that wrecks far too much of what makes this country excellent and unique. I submit to you that John Ashcroft, who accused anyone who disagrees with the Patriot Act of aiding terrorists from the well of our Congress, is the wrong man to hand such sweeping powers over to. I submit that we have surrendered to the terrorists with this Act. We have done what they tried to do. We have done what they could never do. We have helped to murder the idea that is America. We have given those attackers the victory they sought on September 11. They never need to come back again. Thanks to the Patriot Act, their work is done.

Thomas Paine once said, "If there is to be trouble, let it be in my day, so my child may be safe." We did not want this trouble, but we've got it. I ask you, here and now, to make trouble for those who would trouble us with this terrible law.

I ask you, here and now, to stand for a better way than this, a way that defends this nation while standing in the required reverence and awe of the ideals that make this country what it is. I am asking you, as patriots, to stand against this Patriot Act.

William Rivers Pitt is the Managing Editor of truthout.org. He is a New York Times and international best-selling author of three books - "War On Iraq," available from Context Books, "The Greatest Sedition is Silence," available from Pluto Press, and "Our Flag, Too: The Paradox of Patriotism," available in August from Context Books.