This really is a good example essay on results of The Patriot Act.

This really is a good example essay on results of The Patriot Act.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of this authors and don’t necessarily reflect the views of LawTeacher.

The USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act) was established after September 11, 2001 (9/11) when terrorists attacked the United States.

The Patriot Act has raised many concerns about whether or not it infringes in the civil liberties of the people of the nation. Looking back of all time, our past presidents developed laws that have been the stepping stone for the ideas that created the Patriot Act. The government’s job is to protect the social people, nonetheless it has a bigger job which is to protect the world. This has raised many issues involving the Patriot Act and whether or otherwise not it really is more detrimental to us than it is helpful. Pertaining to the Patriot Act and how it deprives those accused under it of Constitutional rights, the American people should be focused on how much power our government has when developing laws governing our civil liberties.

On September 11, 2001 the usa (US) experienced the unthinkable when terrorists attacked the country by itself soil. It was a eye that is serious or must I say reality look for the usa. The usa has many of the most extremely counter that is sophisticated in the world but was not able to prevent such a tragedy. Why didn’t it is seen by them coming? Plenty of thing could be today that is different that question could half been answered prior to 9/11.


This act was compiled from two documents, the Provide Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (PATRIOT) through the homely house of Representatives (House) as well as the Uniting and Strengthening American (USA) Act through the Senate, was merged together creating the Patriot Act. Based on Lemieux, previous laws that are developed by previous presidents to eliminate conflicts were similar to the Patriot Act they just had different names Lemieux, M. (n.d.). Reputation for the united states Patriot Act. Retrieved 9, 2011, from april. The Aliens and Sedition Act of 1798 was developed through the pugilative war with France considering that the US was afraid for the country and also the people and wanted to make sure the enemy failed to sleep amongst us. With this specific power the president managed to have anyone that was believed to be a threat to the government would be arrested and deported. Throughout the Civil War the president suspended Habeas Corpus for the safety benefits of the world, giving the us government the energy to imprison someone without sufficient evidence. During World War II, the President ordered over 10,000 American citizens that had not shown any disloyalty to your United States into confinement camps simply because they were of Japanese descent Lemieux, M. (n.d.). Reputation for the USA Patriot Act. Retrieved 9, 2011, from april. These are the stone that is stepping the introduction of the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act had become as an answer towards the tragic events of 9/11. The bill that will come to be referred to as Patriot Act was introduced to Congress just days after 9/11. It had been revised as a result of concerns from many congressmen that the balance allowed for too broad of a scope of power to authorities that are federal. Eventually following the bill was revised and reintroduced, Congress passed it with little opposition on 26, 2001 october. Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI), would up being the senator that is only vote resistant to the Patriot Act. Even though the Patriot Act would not enter into existence until after 9/11, it will have roots in earlier legislation. On April 25, 1996, President Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act into law. The balance because of this statutory law was introduced following the Oklahoma City Bombing. The main provision of the act made it illegal to give support that is“material to any organization banned because of the State Department. The balance was greatly criticized by Republicans for granting too much capacity to authorities. The bill had to undergo modifications that are major it had been passed in 1996. The bill that wound up becoming law was reported to be a “watered down version” for the original that President Clinton wanted passed. Strangely enough, it absolutely was this act which was broadened and revamped to generate the Patriot Act (Creative Commons, n.d.).

The Patriot Act has been highly criticized for being extremely broad and too open for interpretation since becoming law. In 2004, a judge ruled that parts of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional since they were too vague as well as in violation regarding the First and Fifth Amendments. Another criticism associated with the Patriot Act is the fact that it generally does not guarantee oversight that is enough ensure that the ones that are given power because of the act try not to misuse it. On March 9, 2006 President Bush signed the Patriot Act Reauthorization, but attached a signing statement in which he said that he would ignore specific mandates printed in the balance that will give more judicial and Congressional oversight to agencies authorized utilization of the act. The Attorney General at the time, requesting to have the administration rescind the signing statement since they do not have force of law in late March, letters were written to Alberto Gonzales. In those letters, they cited Article 1, Section 7 regarding the Constitution which states that ‘Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives additionally the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of this united states of america; If he approve he shall sign it, however, if not he shall send it back.’ Alberto Gonzales and President Bush both ignored the letters and never responded. Their argument was that the president could not change legislation that were passed by Congress and say which he did not agree with that he would ignore part of it. On 10, 2007, an appeals court upheld the 2004 ruling that parts of the Patriot Act were unconstitutional december. The court stated that a statute must allow for a person of average intelligence to be able to read and understand the law in the ruling. They found that certain elements of the act were too vague. They determined that then the average person would not know if they were committing a crime (Creative Commons, n.d.) if the law was worded in a way that the average person could not understand,.

Even though many genuinely believe that our terrorist threat from other countries is fantastic, additionally there is driving a car of terrorist attacks from the US by a unique citizens. The Oklahoma City Bombing is a example that is tragic. In some cases, there is certainly a need when it comes to government to suspect an American citizen and do surveillance to safeguard the country from another tragedy that is such. The federal government happens to be doing espionage work for extended than most people think. It isn’t a new practice, but with the technology we now have today, it really is easier for authorities to gather intelligence. Even though they usually have this technology at their disposal that doesn’t imply that the Constitution can be ignored within paper writer the true name of protecting the united states.

One of these of the Patriot Act being used this kind of a way is within the case of Jose Padilla.

He was a Puerto Rican born citizen who later inside the life converted to Islam. He traveled throughout the Middle East and allegedly plotted with al Qaeda terrorists to detonate a bomb” that is“dirty a US city. As soon he was detained as he stepped off a plane in the United States. The Bush Administration claimed though he was an American citizen because he had been deemed an “enemy combatant” by the president that he could be detained even. He was then held in a brig that is military three . 5 years and was allegedly subjected to torture at the hands of US officials trying to elicit information from him. During those times, he was not faced with any crimes though it was said there was clearly evidence that is overwhelming him. He was also cut off from all communication along with his attorney and family(Martinez, 2007).