Patriot Act Peer Reviewed Articles

The Inquiry Journal`s extensive database of academic articles, which represents the work of students from hundreds of institutions around the world, is completely free. Learn more| Blog | Submit The keyword Patriot Act is tagged in the following 3 articles. The administration`s success in preventing another catastrophic attack on the American homeland since September 11, 2001, would have been far more difficult, if not impossible, without the USA Patriot Act. Congressional agencies have significantly improved our ability to prevent, investigate, and prosecute acts of terrorism. The Act gives federal employees broad and broad powers to track and intercept communications for law enforcement and informational purposes. It provides law enforcement agencies with investigative tools to deter and punish acts of terrorism in the United States and abroad. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the federal government responded quickly, taking steps to prevent the recurrence of atrocities and taking preventive measures against individuals suspected of having ties to terrorist groups in the United States and abroad. The bill that surfaced in Congress – Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 – is commonly known as the Patriot Act. 4. The Patriot Act increased penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes.

Americans are threatened by the terrorist who pays for a bomb as well as the one who presses the button. For this reason, the Patriot Act imposed tough new penalties on those who commit and support terrorist operations at home and abroad. In particular, the law: Henderson, Nathan C. “The impact of the Patriot Act on the government`s ability to electronically monitor ongoing national communications.” Duke Law Journal 52 (October 2002): 179–210. Unify and strengthen America by providing the appropriate instruments necessary to intercept and prevent terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001; United States. Constitution. 1. Amendment The Patriot Act significantly expanded the authority of federal public servants by amending old laws and incorporating new provisions. In addition, implementing regulations and related legislation have further expanded federal powers in the fight against terrorism.

The Act and its ancillary measures assist federal agencies in their efforts to close U.S. borders to foreign terrorists, detain and deport terrorists already within U.S. borders, and cut off financial resources used by terrorists and terrorist organizations. Law enforcement agencies have the power to conduct covert searches, intercept telephone and Internet communications, and obtain private records of individuals (including medical and student records) for no probable reason for the purpose of gathering information. An example of the federal government`s broad reach is the controversial seizure of telephone and cell phone recordings from telephone companies without the need to prove reasonable suspicion or probable reason. “The USA-PATRIOT Act and the U.S. Response to Terrorism: Can We Protect Civil Liberties After September 11?” Round table moderated by Jeffrey Toobin. American Criminal Law Review 39 (Fall 2002): 1501.

The USA Patriot Act of 2001 was passed just 45 days after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. Congress passed the Patriot Act by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority, equipping law enforcement agencies with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism: The USA Patriot Act passed the Senate almost unanimously with 98-1 and 357-66 in the House of Representatives, with support from members from across the political spectrum. This article was first published and updated in 2009. The main contributor was Dale Mineshima-Lowe, a professor at Birkbeck University in London. It was updated by the First Amendment Encyclopedia. Its adoption has led to new procedures and sanctions to combat domestic and international terrorism. Definitions of criminal offences, such as terrorist attacks on public transport facilities, biological weapons offences, harbouring terrorists and providing material or financial support to terrorists, have found a specific demarcation in the law. Originally, this provision included a muzzle clause prohibiting anyone who receives a request for records from the government from disclosing that such a request has been received. Gudridge, Patrick O., and Lawrence H. Tribe.

“The anti-emergency constitution.” Yale Law Journal 113 (June 2004): 1801–1870. How patriotic is the Patriot Act? Freedom versus security in the age of terrorism. New York: Routledge, 2004. US-Kongress. House. USA Patriot Act of 2001. HR 3162, 107 Kong., 1st sess. terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001; Terrorism – Prevention – Law and Legislation – United States; National Security – Law and Legislation – United States; Civil Rights – United States Delay Notice Search warrants: an important and age-old tool in the fight against crime Another controversial part of the law was Section 215, which allows the Federal Bureau of Investigation to “file an application for an order requiring the submission of tangible evidence for investigation in order to obtain foreign intelligence. provided that such an investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. The bill passed Congress with broad support. The Senate passed on November 11. The House of Representatives passed the next day.

On 24 October 2001, the House of Representatives passed a “clean” bill, which took into account and settled disputes between the actions of the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Senate approved the amendments the next day with a single vote against and one non-voting member. President George W. Bush signed the law into law on October 26, 2001. Sinnar, Shirin. “Patriotic or unconstitutional? Mandatory detention of aliens under the USA Patriot Act. Stanford Law Review 55 (2003): 1419-1456. The impact of the Patriot Act was both immediate and far-reaching. Abdolian, Lisa Finnegan and Harold Takooshian. “The USA PATRIOT Act: Civil Liberties, Media and Public Opinion.” Fordham Urban Law Journal 30 (May 2003): 1429–1453.

Heymann, Philip B. “Bürgerliche Freiheiten und Menschenrechte nach dem 11. September. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 25 (Spring 2002): 441-456. While these “new” crimes – and associated penalties – have been addressed in previous legislation, the Patriot Act includes a single legislative framework where terrorism and terrorist activity are addressed. As a general rule, the law complements existing laws and increases the penalties associated with them. For example, the law provides for alternative maximum penalties for terrorist acts and increases the penalty for conspiracy to commit a terrorist act against the United States. Cole, David. “The Priority of Morality: The Blind Spot of the Emergency Constitution.” Yale Law Journal 113 (June 2004): 1753–1800.

Shortly after the September 11 attacks, Congress passed the Patriot Act (2001) without debate or discussion of its implications. This complex bill was passed without a clear and serene understanding of how this document would shape our nation and our freedoms. It is unfortunate that there is still a gap between those who know the effects of the Patriot Act and those who do not. This document is not intended to explain the entire Patriot Act. It is a subjective article that aims to highlight some of the ways in which the Patriot Act has fundamentally restricted our civil liberties, thereby fostering racial profiling and hate crimes. We will show how these trends are particularly destructive to schools and universities. If this document succeeds in its intent, you can share our belief that they will only live if they stand up for our rights. Doyle, Charles.

“The USA Patriot Act: A Sketch.” Scientific Service of the Congress. Report to Congress. 18 April 2002. The Act strengthens our counter-terrorism efforts in several ways: 3. The Patriot Act updated the Act to reflect new technologies and threats. The law updated the law so that we no longer have to fight a digital battle with the old gun law agencies left behind by the dial-up era. In the investigation into the murder of Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl, for example, law enforcement used one of the new law enforcement agencies to use high-tech means to identify and locate some of the killers. The Patriot Act has been shrouded in controversy almost since its inception, with parties on both sides of the debate arguing that the measures in the law tend to one extreme or another.