Jefferson Review

"Your Liberty is Our Interest"

Home /  Archives / Links / Quotes / Book Reviews / Advertise /Contact us / Subscribe / Calendar

 The USA PATRIOT Act

By Gordon F. Corbett
gordon@harborside.com

    The USA PATRIOT Act is flagrantly un-Constitutional, and the safety of our rights demands its repeal.

    Take just one part:  the Act allows Federal policemen to demand records secretly with "national security letters" that are not search warrants.  The recipient of these "letters" must disclose to Federal authorities someone's private information and keep that disclosure secret from its owner.

    Briefly, these "national security letters" resemble British King George III's "writs of assistance."  The only difference, for so far as I know, is that the King never required someone who received a writ to keep it secret.

    In a way, the USA PATRIOT Act stems from Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal.  Roosevelt thought that if only he could give the Federal Government power to re-shape our economy, he could get us out of the Depression.  So, he ordered his minions to write laws, such as the National Recovery Act, that would supply the "necessary" power.  The only problem was that these laws were flatly un-Constitutional.  So, when they came before the Supreme Court, the Supremes threw them out the window.

    Roosevelt then threatened to pack the court with "justices" who would do what he wanted.  Seeing that their power was in danger, the Supreme Court decided never again to balk future major reforms proposed by the Executive.

    This surrender inaugurated a "tradition" of disregarding Constitutional strictures.  Phrases like "the Constitution is not a suicide pact" became popular ways of saying that our government's founding document is obsolete.  This aphorism also justified something truly inimical to our freedom.  Instead of obeying the Constitution until they could persuade Congress and the States to amend it, the men in power decided simply to ignore it.  And, so they have done, for more than seventy years.

    Fast-forward to today.  The language of the Fourth Amendment and the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act are diametrically opposed.  So, instead of proposing a Constitutional Amendment whose journey through the States would have taken a long time, and which would almost certainly have ended in failure, Justice Department attorney Viet D. Dinh and his bosses "realistically" wrote legislation as though the Constitution did not exist.

    Our people do not realize all this.  They think that our leaders are looking after our interests, and that if we will only trust them, they will choose to do the things that will benefit those interests most.  That these public guardians will destroy their privacy and do many other nasty things besides is the furthest thing from their minds.

    To understand the danger they face so unknowingly, they need to see a contrast;  and, the best way to highlight that contrast is to create a conflict.  That is why people from all sectors of our political spectrum are offering bills in our States' legislatures to oppose the USA PATRIOT Act.  When the committees' chairmen allow these bills to be heard, both the legislators and the public learn what the USA PATRIOT Act is:  an almost unlimited grant of power to rifle our homes, offices, papers, and effects, in flagrant defiance of our Constitution's Fourth Amendment.

    At the least, opponents of the Act get a chance to let off steam.  At the most, passage of the opposing bills creates a drama that might show every American the danger that unchecked power poses.
 
 

Weather (Louisville) / Mapquest /  White Pages / Business Search / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN