Patriot Act Posturing

How desperate is the ACLU?

Published on May 21, 2005 By drmiler In Politics

Reprint from Wall Street Journal. Just how low will these fools go?

Patriot Act Posturing
How desperate is the ACLU?

Thursday, May 19, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

Several provisions of the Patriot Act come up for renewal this year and debate is already under way in Congress. Today the Senate Intelligence Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on the FBI's subpoena power in terrorism cases, which the Administration wants Congress to expand. It's a closed-door session so that Senators can weigh classified information.

Enter the ACLU. The civil liberties organization is so desperate to derail the Patriot Act that it has gone to the extreme of protesting the closed-door nature of the meeting, saying that "lawmakers are trying to keep legislation to reauthorize the Patriot Act secret." Oh, really? The reason the hearing is closed is because Senators "will discuss actual intelligence operations and how the Patriot Act applies to those operations," a spokesman says.

The subject under discussion is the "administrative subpoena," which would allow the FBI to subpoena documents without first going to a judge in emergency situations involving national security. Congress long ago gave the FBI administrative subpoena power for cases involving narcotics, health-care fraud, child pornography, and a host of other areas in which fast action can make a difference. A party served with an administrative subpoena can challenge it in court if it believes it is unwarranted.

As the ACLU surely knows, one of the reasons the FBI is asking for administrative subpoenas for terrorism cases is customer demand. Since 9/11, hotels, Internet service providers and other businesses have voluntarily cooperated when the FBI has asked for emergency information on terrorist suspects. But in this lawsuit-crazed age, they want the legal cover of being able to say they were complying with a subpoena; it's a way of protecting themselves against liability suits from organizations like the ACLU. Now there's a subject for a Congressional hearing.

Comments

drmiler

on May 21, 2005

bump

thatoneguyinslc

on May 21, 2005

Subpoenas should be issued by judges, not FBI desk jockeys. If they need one, all they need to do is get on the phone, call a judge, and request one. It is a common practice in the judicial system.

I only have problems with certain portions of the PA. Some of it is extremely useful. But things like giving the FBI supboena powers is just wrong. It usurps the Judicial.

drmiler

on May 21, 2005

Here's the main part.

As the ACLU surely knows, one of the reasons the FBI is asking for administrative subpoenas for terrorism cases is customer demand. Since 9/11, hotels, Internet service providers and other businesses have voluntarily cooperated when the FBI has asked for emergency information on terrorist suspects. But in this lawsuit-crazed age, they want the legal cover of being able to say they were complying with a subpoena; it's a way of protecting themselves against liability suits from organizations like the ACLU. Now there's a subject for a Congressional hearing.

The fibbies are just trying to cover their collective butts. You can't fault them for that. The ACLU is just looking for an excuse to haul someones ass into court over the PA. The ACLU wants the "entire" PA shut down. They don't even care whose butt, just somebodies.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!