Controversy Over Legislations Passed in the wake of the 9/11 Attacks

In society today many citizens feel violated with the security methods taken by homeland security. “On September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States marked the beginning of the global war on terrorism. The methods used are justifiable as they provide protection against possible threats or attacks. This attack on U.S. soil increased surveillance of both American citizens and foreign nationals” (Andrew, C., & Walter,

The USA Patriot Act grants government agencies powers in terrorism investigations that it already uses in non-terrorist crimes. Several law abiding citizens have been approached, questioned, and interrogated without probable cause of any criminal activity, basically for engaging in political speech protected by the constitution (Bailie, 2012). The Act freely eliminates privacy rights for individual Americans, it creates more secrecy for government activities, which make it extremely difficult to know about actions the Government are taking.

One beautiful morning in September 2001 many people went about their day like they have before. Some off to work, or traveling for business, or to visit family, and in a blink of an eye our lives in America changed forever. We were attacked, on our own soil, not once, but four times. That fourth plane didn’t make it to its destination, thanks to the brave souls aboard that sacrificed their lives to save others. On that fateful day 2,753(NYmag) families would never be the same, as well as the rest of us that watch in disbelief. The attacks on September 11th 2001 led to something called the Patriot Act. In the days after 9/11 Congress hurried to pass a bill to give law-enforcement agencies the power to fight domestic terrorism. On October 26, President George W. Bush signed three hundred page USA Patriot Act into law (Crf.org). The USA Patriot Act of 2001 was created to prevent and catch terrorist in the United States and around the world. The contents of it has been one of great controversy in the rights of our privacy and the violation of our constitutional rights. Can we give up too much freedom to keep us safe? Where do we draw the line to keep our Country safe?

On September 11th, 2001 the future of the United States changed forever. With almost 3,000 people dying from a terrorist attack that spanned the Eastern U.S., new tactics had to be created to prevent an event like this from ever happening again. Forty-five days after the attack, the USA Patriot Act was passed (Source 5). While only some Americans approved of it, the act was created to protect from terrorism across the country.

After the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001 the United States became a very different place. This drastic change was caused by the initial emotional reactions that American citizens, as well as government leaders had towards the tragic event. The government, in an effort to assure that these events never happen again passed the USA PATRIOT Act, which is an acronym that stands for the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. The major goal of this act is to combat terrorism by giving the government more leeway in what areas they are allowed to use their surveillance tools and also to what circumstances these tools can be used. The major issue that arise with this act are the fact that many of the act can be seen as unconstitutional.

September 11, 2001 sparked many different feelings into the hearts of Americans. People sprang into action to seek revenge and protect America’s precious soils from another deadly attack by reinforcing America’s strength through her government. The men and women of Congress retaliated to the terrorist attacks by drafting and passing the USA PATRIOT Act on October 26, 2001, which stands for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.” The bill was moved through Congress with amazing speed and little hesitation. After the passing, the unsuspecting citizens of America were bombarded with many new rules and regulations that

The Patriot Act was signed into law on October 26, 2001 by President George W. Bush. The act expanded the surveillance capability of both domestic law enforcement and international intelligence agencies. When this law was passed it was under the assumption “to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes” (The USA Patriot). The Patriot Act has given the government the power to spy on the average American through monitoring phone records and calls, gaining banking and credit information, and even track a person’s internet activity. This is an unbelievable amount of power intelligence agencies wield all under the umbrella of national security. This power has gone too far, is unjustified, unconstitutional, and infringes on the privacy of the

The Patriot Act, an act passed by Congress in 2001 that addressed the topic of privacy in terrorist or radical situations, is controversial in today's society. Although it helps with protection against terroristic events, The Patriot Act is not fair, nor is it constitutional, because it allows the government to intrude on citizens' privacy, it gives governmental individuals too much power, and because the act is invasive to the 4th amendment right. To further describe key points in the act, it states that it allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking, and it allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred.

The USA Patriot Act of 2001 is a controversial public policy, which greatly undermines the civil liberties and constitutional freedom of the American people. This essay will moved from an overview of the USA Patriot Act to a review of the critical literature regarding the importance of the Act to the safety of Americans and shows how the Act violates the civil rights and liberties of citizens and noncitizens alike. After presenting sufficient evidence that the Patriot Act violates many of the basic principles that have been articulated in the U.S. Constitution, particularly within the Bill of Rights, I will, propose recommendations that if implemented scrupulously could help to restore American confidence in government's determination to

On September 11, 2001 a national tragedy struck the nation. The terrorist group, al-Qaeda, hijacked 4 passenger airlines and performed multiple suicide attacks at locations such as New York and Washington, D.C. This event struck fear in the American people as this was the largest event that caused the highest lost of lives from a foreign attack on the country. Following the event, the national government was forced to act quickly. The incumbent president at the time, George W. Bush, was left with a difficult task on how to deal with this threat and possible future threats. He worked with Congress to come up with multiple measures they could implement to prevent future events of terrorism.

After the devastating attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, this country scrambled to take action to provide future protection. New techniques had to be developed to protect the nation from the menace of terrorism. Along with the new techniques came the decision to enact laws that some believed crossed the threshold of violating civil liberties this county and those living in it were guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. “On October 26, 2001, the Public Law 107-56, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, also known as the USA Patriot Act, was signed into effect” (Stern, 2004, p. 1112). While speaking to Congress,

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 impacted the American people without many of them realizing it. The act called for increased monitoring of computer networks, phone lines, and online history inside the United States and allowed the government to deport suspects (ACLU). What was created by the act has snaked its way into all aspects of our lives, creating a sense of order and restricting some freedom. However, some say that this imposition into our daily lives limits our freedoms and actions allowed us by the Constitution. Many interest groups voice strong resentment for the act while others try to demonstrate the strengths and triumphs of the Homeland Security Act. This paper will show the differing viewpoints of those that feel that the

The United States of America experienced the greatest, and arguably the most significant, restructure of both governmental and legal proportions in its contemporary history. Following the suddenness of the attacks, the United States was desperate to ensure that an onslaught of a similar stature was subdued. Henceforth, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 was established, bringing into existence the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), a department specifically concerned with internal issues faced by the USA. Primarily made as a direct response to the 9/11 attacks, the role of the DHS is to protect the United States of America and its given states and territories from danger; specifically, terrorist attacks, man-made accidents, and natural disasters; this is commonly seen in airports in the form of Customs and Border Control which are two functions of the DHS, following its subsequent take over of the IHS (Immigration and Naturalisation Services) in 2003. In the same movement for security, the *USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 was legislated in an attempt to “detect and prosecute terrorism and other crimes”

David Blanket, the British Home Secretary, observed that, "our democracy and freedoms are deliberately exploited (Home Department, 2004). Meaning that the freedoms we enjoy as a country, provide the best possible environment for nonconventional terrorism. And in order to protect the American citizens, certain trade-offs between security and liberty need to happen. But where do we draw the line between overly protective and necessary precautions? As citizens in this great nation we cannot rely solely on the government to protect. The American government was created for the people, by the people. And as the people, we need to be more vigilant and not so complacent. We get caught up in our daily lives and forget that there are people out there trying to ruin our way of life. If a majority of American citizens reported suspicious behavior and worked together as a team, it would make our terrorism threat

On September 11, 2001, America suffered from the worst terrorist attack on American soil when many lives were lost at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a rural field in Pennsylvania. This day will live in infamy and will never be forgotten; however, this day also brought about great change within America’s policies on terrorism. Since that fateful day in September 2001, the uncertainty remains leaving Americans to speculate if adequate precautions have been accomplished to bridge the gaps in security; thus, preventing future terror attacks from occurring on American soil. The United States’ government must confirm that homeland security is of the utmost priority, which starts with the president addressing these concerns by taking preventative measures and ensuring that any problems within homeland security are secured before America experiences another attack similar to the ones of September 11, 2001. Therefore, America must determine the security gaps that are a potential issue to homeland security and the best solutions to resolve these gaps. Some potential issues with homeland security include the risk of a weapons of mass destruction attack, cybersecurity threats, improper screening of packages entering the United States, and the issues presented by refugees and visa overstays. While many agree that America has done some things to bridge the gaps in homeland security, such as creating the Department of Homeland Security, there are other preventative measures that