It is a good example essay on Effects of The Patriot Act.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those regarding the authors and never 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 concerns that are many whether it infringes regarding the civil liberties of those of this nation. Looking back of all time, our past presidents developed laws that were the stepping stone for the ideas that developed the Patriot Act. The government’s job would be to protect the social people, nonetheless it has a bigger job that is to safeguard the country. This has raised many issues involving the Patriot https://domyhomework.services Act and whether or not it really 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 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. This was a eye that is serious or do I need to say reality search for the united states. The united states has some of the very most sophisticated counter intelligence on earth but was struggling to prevent such a tragedy. Why didn’t they see it coming? Plenty 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 homely house of Representatives (House) plus 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.). Reputation for 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 throughout the war with France considering that the US was afraid when it comes to country and also the people and wished to ensure that the enemy failed to sleep amongst us. The president was able to have anyone that was believed to be a threat to the government would be arrested and deported with this power. 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 of america into confinement camps simply because they were of Japanese descent Lemieux, M. (n.d.). History of the united states Patriot Act. Retrieved 9, 2011, from http://www.constitutiondenied.com/Media/History-Patriot-Act.pdf april. These are the stepping stone behind the introduction of the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act had become as a reply to your tragic events of 9/11. The balance that would turned out to be referred to as Patriot Act was introduced to Congress just days after 9/11. It had been revised due to concerns from many congressmen that the balance allowed for too broad of a scope of power to authorities that are federal. 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 only senator to vote up against the Patriot Act. Although the Patriot Act did not come into existence until after 9/11, it will have roots in earlier legislation. On 25, 1996, President Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act into law april. The bill for this law was introduced following the Oklahoma City Bombing. The major provision regarding the act managed to make it illegal to deliver “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 balance had to undergo major modifications before it had been passed in 1996. The balance that ended up becoming law was said to be a “watered down version” of the original that President Clinton wanted passed. Strangely enough, it was this act that was broadened and revamped to produce 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 components of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional simply because they were too vague as well as in violation regarding the First and Fifth Amendments. Another criticism of this Patriot Act is that it will not guarantee enough oversight to ensure 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 signing statement in which he said which he would ignore specific mandates printed in the balance that would give more judicial and Congressional oversight to agencies authorized use 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 therefore the Senate, shall, if he approve he shall sign it, however, if not he shall send it back. before it become a Law, be presented into the President of this United States;’ Alberto Gonzales and President Bush both ignored the letters rather than responded. Their argument was that the president could not change legislation that had been passed by Congress and say that he did not agree with that he would ignore part of it. On 10, 2007, an appeals court upheld the 2004 ruling that parts of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional december. When you look at the ruling, the court stated that a statute must provide for an individual of average intelligence in order to learn and understand the law. They found that certain elements of the act were too vague. They concluded that in the event that law was worded in a fashion that the typical average person could not understand, then the average person will never determine if they were committing a crime (Creative Commons, n.d.).

While many believe that our terrorist threat from other countries is fantastic, additionally there is driving a car of terrorist attacks in the US by a unique citizens. The Oklahoma City Bombing is a tragic example. In many cases, there is certainly a necessity when it comes to government to suspect an American citizen and do surveillance to protect the nation from another such tragedy. The government happens to be doing espionage work for longer than many people think. It is really not a practice that is new but with the technology we have today, it really is easier for authorities to gather intelligence. Even though they will have this technology at their disposal that doesn’t imply that the Constitution may be ignored within the name of protecting the US.

One example for the Patriot Act being used this kind of a way is within the case of Jose Padilla.

He had been a Puerto Rican born citizen who later in his life changed into Islam. He traveled for the Middle East and allegedly plotted with al Qaeda terrorists to detonate a “dirty bomb” in a US city. As soon he was detained as he stepped off a plane in the United States. 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 military brig for three and a half years and was allegedly subjected to torture as a result 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 was clearly overwhelming evidence against him. He had been also cut off from all communication with his attorney and family(Martinez, 2007).