The Justice Department, headed by that Attorney General John Ashcroft, indicated that the President would be vetoing a a law known as the SAFE Act, which is the Security and Freedom Ensured Act, sponsored by Senators Larry Craig (R-ID), Richard Durbin (D-IL), John Sununu (R-NH) and Russell Feingold (D-WI). Let's see, that's two Republicans and two Democrats. And both houses of Congress passed the bill. And both houses of Congress are controlled by the Republicans. But our President knows better.
What does the SAFE Act do? It modifies the Patriot Act.
In our system of justice, before the Patriot Act, in order to obtain a search warrant or arrest warrant, a law enforcement officer had to demonsrtate that there was probable or reasonable cause to believe evidence is located in a certain private place or that a person has committed a crime. Reasonable cause must be based on specific facts that can be pointed out, not generalized suspicions or gut feelings. When a search is done or an arrest is made with a warrant, generally, the person had to be given a copy of the warrant or a notice of the contents of the warrant.
The Patriot Act eliminated the probable cause requirement to obtain warrants for wire taps and information from other sources and eliminated the notice requirement if there was some thought that terrorism was an issue.
The SAFE Act restores one of the cornerstones of due process in the American justice system -- reasonable cause.
In obtaining certain personal records, it must be demonstrated that "there are specific and articulable facts giving reason to believe that the person to whom the records pertain is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power" in order to obtain a warrant to get information.
The Act specifically states that a "library shall not be treated as a wire or electronic communication service provider" under the law.
The law will put a limit on the time that notice of a search warrant can be delayed of seven days with a seven day extension if the "court finds reasonable cause to believe, pursuant to a request by the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or an Associate Attorney General, that notice of the execution of the warrant will ... endanger the life or physical safety of an individual; ... result in flight from prosecution; or ... result in the destruction of, or tampering with, the evidence sought under the warrant."
The Attorney General will be required to report to Congress every 6 months about the warrants he has obtained, and the report is open to public scrutiny.
Congress decided that the Patriot Act's grant of power was too broad and subject to abuse, curbing the civil liberties of law abiding citizens and groups, casting a pall over certain freedoms, such as those cherished freedoms granted by the First Amendment.
As you know, a bill does not become a law until the President signs it. This is the bill that the President does not want to sign and wants to veto. And why should a President, one who swore to be bound by the Constitution and the laws of the USA, want to approve such a law that merely opens up his actions to scrutiny by the public, lifting the veil of secrecy under which he has heretofore operated?
Posted by Bill at February 1, 2004 10:50 AMThe whole Patriot Act scares me. As Benjamin Franklin said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Posted by: TW at February 2, 2004 01:31 PM