Snip

By Derrick Broze

To understand the plans of tyrants we must examine past attempts to destroy liberty in the name of security. To understand where we are today we must understand what might have been. In Part 2 of this series we take a look at the infamous Patriot Act II.

In the days following the 9/11 attacks the U.S Congress moved quickly to pass their Orwellian bill the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001,” or simply, the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act dramatically expanded the U.S. government’s abilities to monitor emails and landline phone calls, as well as allowed access to voicemail through a search warrant rather than through a title III wiretap order. There is also section 215 of the Patriot Act, which has been used to justify mass surveillance programs by the National Security Agency. (For more information on the history of the Patriot Act see part 1 of this series.)

While you may be familiar with the dangers and civil liberties violations of the Patriot Act, you may not remember a second threat to freedom launched by the Bush Administration shortly after the passage of the first Patriot Act.

In early February 2003, the Center for Public Integrity obtained a draft of previously unreleased legislation known as the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, or the Patriot II, as it came to be known. The bill was drafted by the staff of John Ashcroft, who was serving as Attorney General at the time.

At the time of the release of the text, the bill had reportedly only been seen by a handful of people, although rumors of an update to the Patriot Act had been swirling around D.C. However, an Office of Legislative Affairs “control sheet” that was obtained by the PBS program NOW with Bill Moyers seems to indicate that a copy of the bill was sent to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert and Vice President Richard Cheney on Jan. 10, 2003. “Attached for your review and comment is a draft legislative proposal entitled the ‘Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003,’” the memo, sent from “OLP” or Office of Legal Policy, says.

The draft of the bill was immediately criticized as an expansion of the already invasive powers granted to the Bush Administration in the first Patriot Act. Dr. David Cole, Georgetown University Law professor and author of Terrorism and the Constitution, told the Center that the Patriot II bill “would radically expand law enforcement and intelligence gathering authorities, reduce or eliminate judicial oversight over surveillance, authorize secret arrests, create a DNA database based on unchecked executive ‘suspicion,’ create new death penalties, and even seek to take American citizenship away from persons who belong to or support disfavored political groups.”

Following the disclosure of the draft, Barbara Comstock, director of public affairs for the Justice Dept., released a statement saying that, “Department staff have not presented any final proposals to either the Attorney General or the White House. It would be premature to speculate on any future decisions, particularly ideas or proposals that are still being discussed at staff levels.”

The American Civil Liberties Union outlined some of the most egregious changes proposed in the draft of the Patriot II. For example, Section 301-306 would have created a “Terrorist Identification Database,” a DNA database for suspected terrorists. Here are a few of the other changes proposed by the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003:

The government would no longer be required to disclose the identity of anyone, even an American citizen, detained in connection with a terror investigation – until criminal charges are filed, no matter how long that takes (sec 201).

Current court limits on local police spying on religious and political activity would be repealed (sec. 312).

The government would be allowed to obtain credit records and library records without a warrant (secs. 126, 128, 129).

Wiretaps without any court order for up to 15 days after terror attack would be permissible (sec. 103).

Release of information about health/safety hazards posed by chemical and other plants would be restricted (sec. 202).

The reach of an already overbroad definition of terrorism would be expanded – individuals engaged in civil disobedience could risk losing their citizenship (sec. 501); their organization could be subject to wiretapping (secs. 120, 121) and asset seizure (secs. 428, 428).

Americans could be extradited, searched and wiretapped at the behest of foreign nations, whether or not treaties allow it (sec. 321, 322).

Lawful immigrants would be stripped of the right to a fair deportation hearing and federal courts would not be allowed to review immigration rulings (secs. 503, 504).

“Where is the evidence that the law passed less than two years ago is insufficient? When will Congress draw the line and say ‘this much of our civil liberties you’ve taken under the guise of terrorism — you may have no more’?”, asked Cindy Cohn, Legal Director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.