Terrorism and the Constitution is organized in four parts. The first provides an historical account of federal investigations of First Amendment activities, focusing on the FBI’s investigative activities prior to 9/11. The authors make a persuasive case that the FBI’s investigative power has frequently been used to harass those involved in controversial political activities, and to disrupt controversial social movements, even where no evidence of illegal activity has been noted. To do this, the authors begin the book with five stories, examples of “the recurring nature of the government’s misguided response to ideological threats.” The stories begin in the years of the Cold War and end in an account of law enforcement since 2001. In Part Three, Cole and Dempsey focus on the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996, a forerunner to the Patriot Act that helped to establish the legal framework for today’s domestic war on terror. The act allows the State Department to designate Foreign Terrorist Organizations in a process that is highly politicized and lacking sufficient objective criteria. It also makes it possible for government prosecutors to bring cases against individuals without proof that they have engaged in terrorism, aided or abetted terrorists, or planned to commit terrorism. Under the 1996 act, the government may freeze the assets of designated terrorist groups and use secret witnesses against those suspected of having links to terrorists. Because many of the 9/11 terrorists
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 devastated the United States people. As they mourned over the deaths caused by the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City, Americans began looking for a way to prevent anything like this from happening again. Consequently, an act known as the USA PATRIOT act was passed by Congress. This act opened up many doors previously closed to law enforcement and intelligence agencies. With these new opportunities available to them, they have the capability to obtain information about specific individuals believed to be involved in terrorist activities and organizations. Very beneficial to the United States, the Patriot Act provides easier access for different government law enforcement agencies to share information, allows government agencies investigative tools that non-terrorist crimes already use, and helps to dismantle the terrorist financial network. Although many people claim that the Patriot Act violates the United States Constitution and the freedoms of the American people, it contains many elaborate safeguards to fight against such abuse.
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.
The threat of terrorism creates a fear that allows government agencies to subvert the United States Constitution and common morals out of the threat that they will be unable to combat terrorism without performing these rights violations. After the attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. on September 11th, 2001, the United States Congress passed the USA PATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Act (“NSA Surveillance Programs”). This act essentially gives a blank check of domestic and foreign rights violations to the federal government, specifically the National Security Agency, as long as the violation is done in the name of fighting terrorism. Reports came out numerous times over the next decade, specifically December 2005, May 2006, and March 2012, detailing how the National Security Agency was able to stretch its powers, even beyond this liberal and controversial bill, to surveil its citizens’ private phone conversations with neither warrants nor provable suspicion of a crime taking or about to take place (“NSA Surveillance Programs”). The former of these reports was by the New York Times, which had known for nearly a year about this program but
In the mist of America ending its wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan here in the homeland we are still be proactive in trying to alleviate terrorist threats and opportunities for terroristic activity in our backyards. When looking at the USA PATRIOT ACT that was enacted to help battle this ongoing pandemic it has come into question whether the laws of the USA PATRIOT ACT extremely broad, narrow, and overarching that they leave too much room for interpretation which in the end has led to violations of a person’s rights that they are guaranteed by the US Constitution.
In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks US Congress passed legislation known as the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 commonly known as the USA Patriot Act. This paper will attempt to prove that not only is the USA Patriot Act unconstitutional but many of its provisions do nothing at all to protect Americans from the dangers of terrorism.
The final assignment for this course is a Final Paper. The purpose of the Final Paper is to give you an opportunity to apply much of what you have learned about American national government to an examination of civil liberties in the context of the war on terror. The Final Paper represents 20% of the overall course grade.
The Patriot Act of 2001 has in many ways changed the way that acts of terrorism and other crimes related to terrorism are handled within the Federal system. The Patriot Act in many ways unites under one law code a few different important clauses relating to tools available to federal law enforcement and also to the new more pressed penalties for terrorist acts. The entire act within itself provides law enforcement a new set of measures and procedures to combating terrorist on the financial field as well as the domestic home front. The most basic of tools that many law enforcement agencies have took advantage of were with the passing of the Patriot Act of 2001 becoming newly available to that of federal investigatory
A paradox has always exists between the issue of civil liberties and national security. Democracy creates civil liberties that allow the freedom of association, expression, as well as movement, but there are some people use such liberal democracy to plan and execute violence, to destabilize State structures. It illustrates the delicate balance existing between reducing civil liberties to enhance security in a state. States have detained suspects for years and have also conducted extensive privacy incursions as strategies to combat terror, however it risks violation of civil liberties. This essay discusses the extent to which a state should be allowed to restrict civil liberties for the enhancement of national security and not abandon democratic values. It looks at aspects of the legal response to terrorism in the United States after the 9/11 attack.
We all remember were we were when the news showed the divitation caused by the Al Qaeda terrorist group on September 11th.The USA patriot act came into effect in order to safeguard the nation from the possible terrorist activities after the dreadful that dreadful day. The USA Patriot act allowed for the various security officers to search homes or business enterprises of any suspect without the owner’s consent, and also allows the FBI to wiretap and have access to certain financial information without the individuals consent. There has been a lot of controversy over the act, because some say it is a violation of their Fourth Amendment right. This research will show some of the pros and cons and why the USA Patriot Act is necessary to
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
I appreciate your forum post this week on terrorism. I agree with you on terrorist activity can be dealt with through the legislative process, but unfortunately, many terrorist attacks that are carried out result in the death of the terrorist. So, it goes back to how can we prosecute dead? I feel that they had good intentions when they generated the USA Patriot Act of 2001 by thinking of what, when, where, and how by surveilling our citizens to see if they aided in any terrorist attack but fail to realize the act was violating our constitutional rights.
Bachmann, S. (2012). Bankrupting terrorism: The role of US anti-terrorism litigation in the prevention of terrorism and other hybrid threats: A legal assessment and outlook. The Liverpool Law Review, 33(2), 91-109. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1007/s10991-012-9115-7
After the events of September 11, 2001, the United States had a unique dilemma. America was engaged in what would be called a “War on Terror”. This new conflict was unlike any in American history. Previously, in the context of war the United States had always fought a nation or group that had defined boundaries as to where they resided. This new conflict went away from these rules of the past. Terrorist groups were not bound to a region, but were instead united by an ideal. September 11 marked the first time in which terrorism would rise to the forefront of the nation’s agenda. This emergent wave of conflict required a different strategy than the those of the past because of the unorthodox nature of the opponent. One of the major innovations fostered by the “War on Terror” was the expansion of torture. The dramatic rise in terrorism sparked the unethical advancement of interrogation techniques in order to more effectively acquire information. The emergence of the “War on Terror” required government officials acquire intelligence in a new way thus spawning the emergence of “enhanced interrogation” methods, however, the morality of these techniques would come into question as they were revealed to the public.
No one can deny that the word terrorism is hated to be heard. Terrorism is commonly known as any action referring to violence against innocent citizens or causing damages to a public or private property for political purposes. According to Maria Keet, (Senior Lecturer with the Department of Computer Science, University of Cape Town) Terrorism is resulted due to plenty of causes that made such a phenomenon be a public concern. Separatism is probably the main reason of arising of terrorism. The conflict between people is due to nationalism and racism issues. This conflict arises with the existence of inequality, racism and political opportunities. Other reason of arising of terrorism is poverty and social inequality. Some statistics proved that 15% of the population consumes 85% of the resources all over the world which made the other 85% of population fight for these resources by any means. Last but not the least; Religion is one of the causes of terrorism especially in Egypt. Terrorism became widely spread in the Egyptian streets after the 30th June revolution in 2013. After the sacking of the former president, who belonged to a religious organization, his supporters decided to spread terrorism all-over the country until the former president gets back to his position as a president of Arab Republic of Egypt. Since then, this terroristic organization performs a terroristic operation which had many impacts on Egypt and Egyptians. Since June 2013,