The House may vote tomorrow to extend three provisions of the PATRIOT Act and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act that allow the government to conduct domestic surveillance of Americans.
The 112th Congress began with a historic reading of the U.S. Constitution. Will anyone subscribe to the First and Fourth Amendments tomorrow when the PATRIOT Act is up for a vote? I am hopeful that members of the Tea Party who came to Congress to defend the Constitution will join me in challenging the reauthorization.
It is clear that more than eight years after the passage of the PATRIOT Act, Congress has failed to do its job: act as a co-equal branch of government exercising checks and balances over Presidential power. Who will and protect the American people from infringements on their most basic constitutional rights if Congress continues to reauthorize the PATRIOT Act?
The passage of the PATRIOT Act in 2001 constituted an unprecedented expansion of executive power and placed basic civil liberties at grave risk. Provisions scheduled for extension, such as Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to order any person or business to turn over "any tangible things" with vague reason.
Orders executed under this provision constitute a serious violation of First and Fourth Amendment rights by allowing the government to demand access to records often associated with the exercise of First Amendment rights, such as library or medical records.
As Members of Congress, we are obligated to protect the rights and civil liberties afforded to us by the Constitution and to exercise our oversight powers fully. Despite years of documentation evidencing abuse of these provisions by the Inspector General of the Department of Justice, they may extended without any meaningful debate or opportunity to implement common-sense reforms to ensure that the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans are fully protected. Our failure to do so makes Congress complicit in these violations of basic constitutional rights.
Follow Rep. Dennis Kucinich on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RepKucinich
Ben Griffith: What the Tea Party And Evangelicals Both Get Wrong
the prez. used the power of his office to lobby for, and get, expansions of the phaytreeot act that continue the suborning of our Bill of Rights--an odd thing for a constitutional scholar to do.
Kucinich is correct. The entire thing needs to be gotten rid of. But I have a feeling that President O no longer feels the way Candidate O once did on that matter.
Obama Administration quietly expands Bush's legal defense of wiretapping program
John Byrne
Published: Tuesday April 7, 2009
86diggsdigg
Print This Email This TwitThis
In a stunning defense of President George W. Bush's warrantless wiretapping program, President Barack Obama has broadened the government's legal argument for immunizing his Administration and government agencies from lawsuits surrounding the National Security Agency's eavesdropping efforts.
In fact, a close read of a government filing last Friday reveals that the Obama Administration has gone beyond any previous legal claims put forth by former President Bush.
Responding to a lawsuit filed by a civil liberties group, the Justice Department argued that the government was protected by "sovereign immunity" from lawsuits because of a little-noticed clause in the Patriot Act. The government's legal filing can be read here (PDF).
For the first time, the Obama Administration's brief contends that government agencies cannot be sued for wiretapping American citizens even if there was intentional violation of US law. They maintain that the government can only be sued if the wiretaps involve "willful disclosure" -- a higher legal bar.
September 28, 2010, 10:49 am
Internet Wiretapping Proposal Met With Silence
By VERNE G. KOPYTOFF
An Obama administration plan to make wiretapping the Internet easier for law enforcement and national security agencies was met with silence by online companies Monday.
Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo and Research in Motion – never shy about issuing press releases – all declined to talk about what would be a major shift in privacy law.
Next year, the Obama administration intends to ask Congress for new regulations that it says are necessary as more people – and criminals – communicate online rather than on the telephone. The rules would require Internet companies to create an easy way for law enforcement and security officials to monitor encrypted e-mails and messaging services like Skype, which allow users to talk “peer to peer.”
By Stephanie Woodrow | February 27, 2010 5:51 pm
Printable Version
Rights/Reprints
President Barack Obama on Saturday signed into law legislation that would temporarily extend three controversial provisions of the Patriot Act that had been set to expire.
The House took final congressional action on the measure on Thursday, voting 315-97 to keep in place the Patriot Act’s “lone wolf,” business records and “roving wiretap” powers until Feb. 28, 2011. The Senate had passed the bill by voice vote Wednesday night.
Last year President Barack Obama's promise to increase oversight of wiretapping practices was put on hold after Congress passed a one-year extension of the Patriot Act in March 2010 that made no changes to the law.
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/subjects/civil-rights/
“Revise the PATRIOT Act. … As president, Barack Obama would
revisit the PATRIOT Act to ensure that there is real and robust oversight of tools like
National Security Letters, sneak-and-peek searches, and the use of the material
witness provision.”
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/CounterterrorismFactSheet.pdf
Way to go Dennis, kill the Patriot act!
Besides, Obama's first two years were taken up with shoveling out Bush's augean stables and dealing with a bunch of obstreperous two-year-olds who just learned the word "no!".
Probably - Secretly, of course! - "prefer" Sausages and Pane, to Bowls of Soup and Oysters, too!
Ernst Rohm - and the Beer Hall Putsch, of course! - come to mind, anyone?
It SHOULD be the, "Those Who Fail to Learn From History..........Party!"
If you listen to the Tea Party, they actually sound like they'd prefer we go back to the Articles of Confederation, but then again, I doubt they know what that is.