Patriot Act Research Paper

Trying to strengthen national security as quickly as possible, this act made changes to US law, so that future acts of terrorism could be prevented. This act specifically allows foe the wider uses of actions and tools when looking for harmful terrorists. Although both acts called for enhancing national security and defense when it was needed, the Patriot Act is more effective in not only securing protection for US citizens, but is also a necessary action. In

The USA Patriot Act, also known as "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism" was a rushed act passed 45 days after the devastating terrorist attack on the twin towers September 11th, 2001. It was composed with the intention of finding and prosecuting international terrorists on American soil, but consequently violated the constitution. In addition, the Patriot act allows surveillance on all emails, internet, and cell phones to try and catch terrorists. Regardless, the act ended up having more power than primarily planned as stated in the CNN debate on the patriot act. America was founded on the principle of individual liberties and the pursuit of happiness in the context

Three amendments that should be made to the act are that only communications to or from a target may be gathered by the NSA, US persons located outside of the United States may only be targeted if they have connections to foreign powers, and that before use in domestic courts, prosecutors must ensure that all data used in the investigation is gathered

The Patriot Act was a legislation that passed that allowed

1. The Patriot Act (Title II, Sec. 213) allows for the delayed notification of the execution of a search warrant. Under what circumstances can the notification be delayed? The Patriot Act upholds a standard for the protection of privacy while performing search and seizure actions under the emphases that a physical warrant document is issued to the person that the search is performed on.

The USA Patriot Act was signed into law on Oct. 26, 2001, due to the need for cooperation among all levels of security. Police and other department agencies were given powerful authority and encouraged to share information. This is to meet the goal for a safer America in times of turmoil including international affairs. But as the years have passed and as terrorist attacks seem to cease, people have begun to question if there’s too many restrictions on law enforcement were called off.

The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022, has a few components to it but the mainly parts in regards to domestic terrorism would be that the bill establishes new requirements to expand the availability of information that can monitor, analyze, investigate, and prosecute domestic terrorist acts (H.R.350 - Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022 117th ... - congress). The act would also require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to jointly report on domestic terrorism related incidents or attempts (H.R.350 - Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022 117th ... - congress). While this is a more recent policy to be proposed, it does show that the policies that fail do not always have to be from the past. There were a few reasons for this policy not being successful. In comparison to the USA PATRIOT Act, which was rapidly enacted due to the events of September 11, 2001, the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022 had more time to be looked over and analyzed, there were not any events that had occurred to push the bill into law.

A week after the Septeber 11 attacks, the Bush administration proposed to the United States Congress the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, introducing radical changes to combat money laundering that finance terrorist groups, give authority to agencies like FBI to gather domestic intelligence on potential terrorists and construct stricter judicial procedures for deporting suspected terrorists. The most important act passed by the US government was The PATRIOT Act, passed in October 2001, which gained strong support in both chambers. The PATRIOT Act mandated that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provide criminal records to
 Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and State Department officials during visa screening. Beginning of 2002,

It is impossible to discuss civil liberties and security without talking about 9/11 and the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was passed almost immediately after 9/11, hugely expanding intelligence agencies ability to investigate potential terrorism. However, critics of the law say that it infringed on the civil liberties of the innocent and did not guarantee proper oversight of law enforcement agencies in their execution and use of these newfound powers. I agree that as war and violence evolve, so must our methods of preventing them. In this digital age preventing such violence means monitoring information channels and being able to respond to leads rapidly and subtly.

This paper will discuss how to balance out civil liberties and security in intelligence activities; mainly surrounding the topic of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2002. With this topic and its perceived downfalls, identifying how to make both sides work efficiently will be discussed. Discussion When asked the question of “how can the United States balance civil liberties and security in intelligence activities?” the thought of the USA PATRIOT Act comes into mind; for two reasons. The first one is it caused a enormous uproar in the community after it was enacted based upon the fact it was perceived to infringe on civil liberties.

“At least 42 terrorist attacks aimed at the United States have been thwarted since 9/11” (Reality). The majority of people know about the tragedy that happened on September 11th, 2001, but not that many people know about what came to be after the event; the Patriot Act. This act is the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001” (Miller). The Patriot Act got put in place by the President and almost got a unanimous vote to pass it nearly ten days after. It was later used to take down many of the 42 attack plots.

Soon after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the United States felt the need to increase security and create something that would help the government prevent another attack. In came the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act is laws passed that kept up with new technology to be able to keep up with the more sophisticated criminals. Many of the ideas I agree with and see as routes to keep the government officials on the right track; however, there is one part I feel is an unnecessary part and should not have been included in the Act. I personally don't believe that the Patriot Act has done anything to help prevent terrorist attacks.

Judge Marrero gave a simple solution that would resolve the problem by, “Sharply limiting the FBI’s ability to silence recipients while allowing more oversight from the courts”(7). As late President James Madison once said, “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition”(8). A beautiful and powerful aspect of the constitution is the checks and balance of power. It helps safeguard freedoms by stopping any of the three branches of government from getting too powerful (9). Would it not be a great idea to implement this great concept of guarding our liberties to the Patriot Act?

But a law passed by the Congress could be so restrictive and so repressive? In general, some opinions seemed exaggerated, and more importantly the enforcement of the Patriot Act resulted in reduction of terrorism threat in America despite the controversy, which objective is to loosen the law’s grip on terrorism.

National defence and security strategy are formulated through some fundamental considerations based on the security objectives and national interests. National defence and security policy refers to the government’s vision and mission that are realized proportionally, balanced and well-coordinated. To achieve this goal, the government has developed a national defence and national security strategy. “It includes strategic objectives, how to achieve the goals and defence resources in order to accomplish strong, effective and high deterrence state defence capabilities” . Based on that phenomenon, Darmono B. further described regarding the Indonesian national security concepts (Darmono, 2010): 1.