More than two centuries ago in his address to the national resolve, Benjamin Franklin condemned the policy of sacrificing liberty in the name of security: “Those who would give up essential liberty, to gain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty no[r] salary” (Davis 8). Later in our history, the great and eloquent CBS broadcaster and newsman, Edward R. Murrow, who is viewed as a turning point influence in the McCarthy era, while questioning the legacy of communist-witch-hunt investigations that overwhelmed the country due to State’s intention to protect nation from “Reds” infiltration, believed that “[T]here must be a place to protect the state and the right of individual at the same time” (Stockwell 2). Similar are today’s concerns …show more content…
As emotions of the tragic 9/11 events demanded and as its title unfolds, the Act’s primary purpose is intended to reveal and prevent terrorist attacks within the United States by means of “appropriate tools.” However, a candidate for J.D. at Northwestern University School of Law, Manas Mohapatra, asserts in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology that its tools or provisions are a long-waited “wish list” of federal investigators which has rather broader applications than only prevention of terrorist-related activities …show more content…
For instance, one of the Act’s provisions permits law enforcement authorities to use National Security Letters issued by FBI officials instead of warrants authorized by a judge. Thus, with these relatively low standards of proof warrants the Act permits federal agents to access wide range of personal information, such as medical, library, educational, financial, and travel records. In addition, the new law amends Privacy Act and Family Educational Rights by allowing law enforcement authorities to request and obtain student information “in conjunction with a terrorism investigation” (Hockeimer 2). It also grants intelligence authorities to secretly search suspects’ homes without any initial notification if the latter has “an ‘adverse result’ on the investigation” (Kassop 6); what is more, it prohibits “subpoenaed” business from telling anyone whose records were requested and investigated by FBI (Swartz “PATRIOT Act’s Reach Expanded” 1). As Barbara Dority, the president of Humanist of Washington, makes the case in her article “Your Every Move” published in The Humanist, the PATRIOT Act further broadens a definition of domestic terrorism describing it as “act[s] dangerous to human life that