The moment that the Twin Towers fell in New York, America became destined for change. In the wake of these attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 was quickly passed through congress, and signed by then-president, George W. Bush. The act itself gives the FBI and other government agencies the ability to do and use certain methods, many of which are already used by other law enforcement organizations, to help prevent future terrorist attacks. Since then, this piece of legislation has been the center of much debate and controversy. But, there is ample reason to believe that the Patriot Act is needed and effective. The Patriot Act has been used effectively because it has extensive supervision, is completely constitutional, and has helped to protect …show more content…
One group that argues this is the American Civil Liberties Union, which strongly disagrees with the Patriot Act. They have stated that investigations into the Patriot Act, “reveal thousands of violations of law,” (ACLU), while this is simply not true. One controversial piece of the Patriot Act are roving wiretaps. These allow government investigators to follow and put surveillance on certain people, rather than certain devices, so that they may save time and effort. According to Nathan Sales, a law professor at George Mason University, “Federal courts agree that Title III’s roving wiretaps authority is constitutional and… provides strong support for constitutionality,” (Sales). This is a clear example that shows that even the most controversial parts of the Patriot Act are not just constitutional, but strongly supported by the Constitution. From this, many see that any attempted claims that the Patriot Act is wrong in the law are based merely on thought. But, there are more than one sections of the Patriot Act that are up for debate. Any arguments against the Patriot Act are destroyed quickly due to the fact that, “no single provision of the Patriot Act has ever been found unconstitutional,” (McNeil). Once again, it is clear that the Patriot Act is constitutional. This becomes extremely important in the eyes of the law however, because there is now no argument against the Patriot Act when seen from this
Trying to strengthen national security as quickly as possible, this act made changes to US law, so that future acts of terrorism could be prevented. This act specifically allows foe the wider uses of actions and tools when looking for harmful terrorists. Although both acts called for enhancing national security and defense when it was needed, the Patriot Act is more effective in not only securing protection for US citizens, but is also a necessary action. In
The Patriot Act is one of today’s most controversial laws. The law’s official name is the USA PATRIOT Act, which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. The law was passed in 2001 after the September Eleventh terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. The act greatly increased the power of the government in preventing terrorism, but it also increased the amount of surveillance that the government performs on citizens.
After the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, the United States government reacted quickly and firmly with the USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism). The purpose of this act was to prevent another terror attack of the same magnitude as the 9/11 attack, but some people believe this act encroaches too heavily on civil rights. The USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act) threatens liberty more than it hinders terrorism, goes against the Constitution, and needs to be modified so it doesn’t breach the Constitution. The USA PATRIOT Act interferes with the liberties of companies and people in the United States while doing more to impact lawful Americans than terrorists.
The USA PATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001) was a necessary and effective piece of legislation that enhanced the security of the nation and will continue, in a modified form, to prevent future terrorist attacks although it was quite intrusive on American’s civil liberties. According to detailed study of the decade following 9/11, “If we just look at the decade between 2001 and 2011, we still see that the number of terrorist attacks has declined since Sept. 11.” So, in terms of achieving its goal, it has been successful. Signed into law by President George W. Bush in October of 2001 in the wake of the terrorist attacks on the United States during
Many American citizens are willing to give up a certain degree of their rights, including their own privacy, to try and keep our country safe from terrorism. No matter the reason, however, it is never justifiable to interfere on our Constitutional rights. Former President Bush eavesdropping on innocent citizens, the USA PATRIOT Act, the Freedom Act, and Japanese internment camps are all primary examples of our constitutional rights as Americans being overlooked. “The United States trampling on the Constitutional rights of its citizens to protect the nation is never justifiable.” After the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1942, the United States were on their toes.
Even Obama who promised, “In his campaign for the presidency, a repeal of some of its more sinister provisions (surveillance, wiretaps and so forth). It has not been repealed… Obama this year signed a four-year extension of it.” The Quote makes a point that the government officials believe that everything under the patriot act should still
The USA Patriot Act was signed into law on Oct. 26, 2001, due to the need for cooperation among all levels of security. Police and other department agencies were given powerful authority and encouraged to share information. This is to meet the goal for a safer America in times of turmoil including international affairs. But as the years have passed and as terrorist attacks seem to cease, people have begun to question if there’s too many restrictions on law enforcement were called off.
Not every policy and strategy enacted can be a success, as a country we would never learn or find ways to improve if there were no failures. Since the inception of the Department of Homeland Security, many policies and strategies have been proposed and implemented, some being successful and some needing a revision or another policy enacted to change the failure to potential success. Here we will look at two policies, the USA PATRIOT Act and the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022. While these are reactions to events that have occurred, as many policies proposed or implemented, were reactions to events that had occurred. They are also future prevention strategies to help efforts to keep the homeland safe and secure.
A week after the Septeber 11 attacks, the Bush administration proposed to the United States Congress the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, introducing radical changes to combat money laundering that finance terrorist groups, give authority to agencies like FBI to gather domestic intelligence on potential terrorists and construct stricter judicial procedures for deporting suspected terrorists. The most important act passed by the US government was The PATRIOT Act, passed in October 2001, which gained strong support in both chambers. The PATRIOT Act mandated that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provide criminal records to Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and State Department officials during visa screening. Beginning of 2002,
The patriot act has in my opion violated the 4th amendment. It has its advantages as far as terrorizim but to normal citzens this is a complete violation of our privacy. bThe late Benjermin Franklin warned us about trading our liberty for sucureity. This act has taken away a lot of our liberties it gives the government way too much power to invade our privacy. They now have unprecedented power to monitor the phone calls, e-mails, without a warrant.
NSA hides the fact that they are monitoring on US citizens without the warrant as they find some connection between the person monitored and some illegal activity to justify their monitoring. At first, after the 9/11, President George W. Bush started a program of mass monitoring of US communication. He had started it without FISA Court’s knowledge and when the population find out about this Congress had to create and enact the FISA Amendment Act of 2008 and inside was the crucial Section 702 that, by law, validates mass monitoring over the last 7 years. These communication monitoring systems rely on these two statutes: FISA Amendment Act of 2008 (Section 702) and Patriot Act (Section 215).
On September 11th, 2001, tragedy struck America. A terrorist attack was carried out resulting in 2,753 Americans killed. America became locked in a war, and it needed more security on its own soil. So, congress passed a law known as the Patriot Act. This allowed the N.S.A (national security agency) to gain information of individual citizens or groups of individuals by using library records, phone calls and other surveillance.
The Patriot Act and Civil Liberties Civil liberties and freedoms are a fundamental part of America, and the lives of its citizens. Americans believe that they are born with these rights, and that nobody, not even the government who provides these rights, can take them away. Some people are willing to give up some of these freedoms for safety, but many have grown used to them and will not accept any infringement into their lives. The events of 9/11 are a major contributing factor to relinquishing of some of these rights by citizens for the protection of freedom and of the country. They believe that the government knows how to protect them from terrorists, but their rights will not be violated like those of a terrorist.
Soon after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the United States felt the need to increase security and create something that would help the government prevent another attack. In came the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act is laws passed that kept up with new technology to be able to keep up with the more sophisticated criminals. Many of the ideas I agree with and see as routes to keep the government officials on the right track; however, there is one part I feel is an unnecessary part and should not have been included in the Act. I personally don't believe that the Patriot Act has done anything to help prevent terrorist attacks.
In the midst of potential war and terror many are worried of what the future holds. This is how the American people felt after the terrible terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The government had to think fast and make brash decisions to protect our country, and The Patriot Act (during the time) was the best solution. The Patriot Act was one of the fastest acts passed, many government officials were only thinking of the present, and ways to prevent foreign attack. The act has been edited several times over the years due to many mistakes of violating individual’s rights.