Purple+Kangaroos



"[|USA PATRIOT Act] ." __The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition__. 2008. //Encyclopedia.com.// 2 Dec. 2009 < [|http://www.encyclopedia.com] >.

USA PATRIOT Act: Columbia Encyclopedia Patriot act calls for:
 * USA PATRIOT stands for **U**niting and **S**trengthening **A**merica by **P**roviding **A**ppropriate **T**ools **R**equired to **I**ntercept and **O**bstruct **T**errorists
 * Was meant to give the government ability to fight against “international and domestic terrorism”
 * No one in Congress wanted to oppose the Act because of the recent happenings of September 11, 2001
 * Act applies not only to terror crimes but to criminal acts generally
 * Allowed number of terror-related offenses to be increased
 * Money laundering reporting requirements, crimes, penalties expanded
 * Civil libertarians – afraid of law enforcement abuse based on Patriot Act
 * Law enforcement abuses: reduced judicial oversight of wiretaps, more law-enforcement access to records “held by third party businesses and organizations”
 * Definition of “providing material to terrorists” widened – less defined; people can be charged more easily
 * Act was created to reduce the restrictions that laws had put on government to stop power abuse (events like Watergate, Anti-Vietnam war protesters, civil rights groups, etc.)
 * 2003 – vocal opposition to Bush admin’s draft of Domestic Security Enhancement Act, an expansion of USA PATRIOT Act
 * DSEA was never submitted to Congress
 * Renewals on USA PATRIOT act were supposed to expire at the end of 2005; opponents in Senate stalled to make them permanent
 * Modifications made in 2006; act renewed and most sections became permanent
 * Some aspects of law challenged in courts – different results
 * The “enhancement of domestic security” to prevent terrorism
 * Better surveillance procedures
 * Reduction of money laundering and financing (for terrorism)
 * Northern border protection
 * Removal of anything obstructing the terrorism investigations
 * The “provision of aid and assistance” to victims of terrorism, public safety officers, and their families
 * More sharing of information between all levels of government
 * The “strengthening of criminal laws against terrorism”
 * The “improvement of intelligence capabilities”
 * NO discrimination of Arab or Muslim Americans
 * NO acts of violence against Arab or Muslim Americans – you can be prosecuted


 * Opponents of USAPA believe that the law was created too hastily and that it gave “disproportionate consideration” to point of view of law enforcement agencies/individuals
 * Others believe that broadening of surveillance procedures may cause government abuse of these powers
 * Act does, however, call for oversight of executive branch’s expanded powers by Congress
 * Federal law enforcement agencies must share information with Director of Central Intelligence

Notes by: MS

"New York Times Reveals Government Spying (sidebar)." // Issues & Controversies On File. Issues & Controversies //. Facts On File News Services, 27 Jan. 2006. Web. 3 Dec. 2009. [].

//New York Times// Reveals Government Spying (sidebar) <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Notes by: MS
 * December 2005 – //NYT// published article revealing government tapping of private phone lines and emails, done secretly
 * News of surveillance program spread around the world to embarrass Bush admin
 * Covert spy program run by National Security Agency (NSA)
 * Publishers knew about the program for about a year prior to the article’s publication – people wondered why they “sat” on it so long
 * After news of NSA ​program was leaked to //NYT// in 2004, publishers met with White House/Bush Admin Staff
 * Bush admin asked publishers not to release information on surveillance program so that it would not endanger domestic security of the country
 * If terrorists found out about NSA program, country could become unsafe for some citizens
 * Personnel related to //NYT// thought that the public deserved to know the truth about the program and lobbied for immediate release of article
 * Editors and others urged for patience – they needed more information and they knew the NSA program didn’t break any laws
 * Hesitation to publish article may have been because of other reporting errors on Weapons of Mass Destruction (Iraq) articles in 2002
 * Waited for time when the article would really affect the public
 * Published story to hamper Congress’ efforts (which were happening at the time of publication) to renew the law enforcement abilities of Patriot act

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS,Arial,Helvetica;">Kranich, Nancy. __The Impact of the USA PATRIOT Act__. March 2006 FEPP. Demember 3, 2009 <http://www.fepproject.org/commentaries/patriotactupdate.html>. Notes by: CC
 * Allows law enforcement officials to peer into Americans most private reading, research, and communications
 * Was created as a way of countering terrorism
 * Has also foiled crimes not related to terrorism such as drug violations, credit card fraud, and bank theft.
 * Laws were passed that protected libraries from the Patriot Act.
 * Private information that is obtained from searches can provide information about terrorist acts
 * Some people want to increase the effects of the act
 * The things that will be added are longer prison sentences, expanding secret searches, and interfering with Arab business transactions
 * Section 504 specifically mentions subpoenaing consumer records from telecommunication companies, Internet service providers, and financial service firms
 * The Pentagon believes that the technology used for government surveillance can be used for war
 * The technology can be used to map out battlefields
 * The government is allowed to eavesdrop into your Internet activities
 * Many states and cities are against the Patriot Act
 * The government is allowed to do these searches without person or group with knowledge of it happening
 * Little is known about how the Patriot Act is actually practiced
 * Some people believe that the Patriot Act goes against the rights of a U.S citizen
 * The government believes that they are just beginning to add law referring to the Patriot Act
 * Though some members in the government are trying to reduce the impact made by the Patriot Act
 * Some believe that the Patriot Act is causing a negative effect on libraries and the patrons of those libraries
 * The secret searches that have been made by law enforcement have decreased terrorism and crime rates
 * Some surveillance that are used in the Patriot Act go against the rights of innocent Americans
 * The government then took away the surveillance tat went against these rights
 * Another thing the act is used for is keeping dangerous criminals or terrorists off of planes
 * A lot of people believe that the Patriot Act is doing its job just right
 * Another effect is that passengers on a maritime vessel might have to submit to identification and background checks
 * States are trying to mine data to protect citizens from terrorism
 * Goes against a citizens right of free expression
 * Change is apparently going to come soon to the Patriot Act to protect the civil liberties of an American citizen
 * Librarians have been going against the Patriot Act
 * Some communities are becoming separated from the Patriot Act since some citizens believe it is “unfair"
 * The government sometimes is mistaken when arresting suspected terrorists because the system is somewhat unreliable
 * The government sometimes is mistaken when arresting suspected terrorists because the system is somewhat unreliable

[] ACLU. __Court Rules Patriot Act's "National Security Letter" Gag Provisions Unconstitutional__. December 18,2008. December 3, 2009 <http://www.aclu.org/national-security/court-rules-patriot-acts-national-security-letter-gag-provisions-unconstitutional>. USA PATRIOT ACT: supporters say provisions are needed 1. The government says that the patriot act protects citizens from terrorist attacks since September 11th and will continue to do so 2. People who support this act says that the p.a. is a crucial part for our country so that we have a repeated terrorist attack 3. Since the p.a. has been in play there have been no incidents of terrorism in the US 4. As said by Mueller, “are crucial to our presence and future successes”. About the p.a. 5. since the patriot act the FBI has made substantial movement in providing security against terrorism and investigating 6. The FBI has also stated that while investigating terrorism that they are also protecting civil liberties 7. Supporters say that secrecy needs to be built into the p.a., particularly in delayed notification and people who are subject to the terrorism

USAPA: Patriot act changes law enforcement 1. After the sep. 11th attacks congress has said that laws need to change so that Americans and citizens can be safe from terrorist attacks 2. Congress states that law enforcement needs to change so that law enforcement can apprehend terrorists before they strike again 3. Under Section 218: a. FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) warrants are used so that gathering intelligence on foreign investigations and on covert operations as opposed to arrested criminals b. FISA warrants are require less evidence of wrongdoing but are only used for foreign intelligence 4. under Section 215: a. under an investigation police can search people who check out certain books on or about terrorism have the right to be searched in an intelligence or international terrorism investigation

USAPA: Court cases involving the p.a.


 * __ACLU vs. Supreme Court__**

[] Wilson, Mark. __Update:USA Patriot Act__. December 10,2007. December 2,2009 <http://www.2facts.com/icof_story.aspx?PIN=i1000240&term=patriot+act>.
 * __Facts__**: In October of 2005 the ACLU filed against the Supreme Court to let libraries speak out against the FBI demanding the libraries to release their records. The p.a. came up for renewal. The ACLU said that the FBI gave an investigative subpoena demanding info on their patrons. The letter demanded the library, “all subscriber info, billing info, and access logs”, connected to an investigation.
 * __Constitutional Issue__**: Whether the FBI had the right to subpoena the library for private info.
 * __Outcome__**: Recent changes in the p.a. gave the FBI more discretion to ease such security rules and because of the library group’s identities had already been known.
 * __ACLU and NYCLU vs. FBI__**
 * __Facts__**: ACLU and NYCLU (New York Civil Liberties Union) files against the FBI for NSL’s (National Security Letter) to demand private customer records from Internet Service Providers and then forbid them from discussing the NSL records
 * __Constitutional Issue__**: Whether the gag-order violated the customers, of the Internet Service Providers, 1st amendment rights, and whether the FBI had the right to place such a gag order.


 * __Outcome:__** The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that the gag-order place by the FBI for terrorist provisions ruled in favor of the ACLU and NYCLU.

"Monitoring Protest with the USA Patriot Act (sidebar)." //Issues & Controversies On File:// n. pag. //Issues & Controversies//. Facts On File News Services, 9 Sept. 2005. Web. 3 Dec. 2009. <http://www.2facts.com/article/ib100489>. []

= Monitoring Protest with the USA Patriot Act (sidebar) = = 1. The F BI and other Federal Agencies are allowed to observe public meetings for any signs of terrorism = = 2. The FBI has also informed that if any police officer either suspects or sees any sign of counterterrorism attacks = = 3. The FBI and other gov’t agencies want to increase surveillance saying that they are necessary to ensure large-scale demonstrations to be under control. = = 4. FBI urged the demand to question political activists about their plans at the Democratic National Convention. = = 5. Some of the activists who were interviewed alleged that antiterrorist agencies intimidated them. Saying that possible terrorists attacks may make them not attend = = 6. Supporters of such surveillance techniques, however, point out that they are in place not to stifle political dissent but to keep a close watch on potential criminal   act   ivities  = = 7. Supporters say that “spying” on such surveillance techniques may help with being an important tool on war terrorism  = = 8. Opponents say that they hate being named in the same category as terrorists  = Notes by:BB

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">"Antiterrorism Policies and Civil Liberties Follow-up: Secret Domestic Surveillance Programs Uncovered; Report Details FBI Misuse of Patriot Act." // Issues & Controversies On File: // n. pag. // Issues & Controversies //. Facts On File News Services, 9 Mar. 2007. Web. 3 Dec. 2009. <http://www.2facts.com/article/ib602190>.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Antiterrorism Policies and Civil Liberties Follow-Up: Secret Domestic Surveillance Programs Uncovered; Report Details FBI Misuse of Patriot Act: · March 2007 – report detailed FBI Misuse of USA Patriot Act · December 2005 – Bush authorized wiretapping and domestic surveillance secretly (see //New York Times// notes above) without court warrants · Bush also secretly authorized surveillance of phone calls and emails going from the U.S. to other countries · NSA couldn’t monitor activity entirely in the U.S. without a warrant · January 2007 – Congress and the Justice Department legalized a secret federal court to oversee the wiretapping program · Number of U.S. lawmakers argued that NSA was infringing on the rights of the citizens after a May 11, 2006 //USA Today// article was released · // USA //// Today // May 30, 2006 – retracted parts of the May 11 article · Justice Department’s inspector general reported FBI misuses of the USA Patriot act on March 9 – FBI was using act to “secure information on tens of thousands of U.S. residents and foreign nationals” · Report accused FBI of “disregarding and misunderstanding rules on the use of National Security letters, which were used to collect telephone records, e-mail addresses and other personal information on people connected to terrorism and espionage cases” · FBI Director Robert Mueller III took responsibility for agency’s failures, and said that the misuse was caused by errors in procedures, not by malicious/intent to hurt anyone · No one harmed while the errors occurred and stressed that National Security letters were necessary in the fight against terrorism · Mueller said: the FBI had “already taken steps to correct these deficiencies” Notes by: MS

Belt, Dave. "The USA Patriot Act." 12/4/09. <http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/terrorism/homeland/patriotact.html>.
 * The US Patriot Act was passed in a response to the 9-11 terrorist attack in the US (BH)
 * The purpose is to eliminate any further attacks on America(BH)
 * Some say the act infringes on Americans rights as a citizen(BH)
 * When President Bush signed the act into law he said it was to help law enforcement to identify, to dismantle, to disrupt and to punish terrorist (BH)
 * Terrorist are using advanced equipment(BH)
 * Gives government the right to search for information if they find a suspected terrorist(BH)
 * Government can use wire taps and other surveillance techniques to try and catch the suspected terrorists(BH)
 * The appeals court says that using surveillance and wire taps does not go against the Constitution(BH)
 * President Bush signed the revised act mere hours before it was going to expire(BH)
 * The revised act now included new tools to help law enforcements stop the trafficking of methamphetamine ,such as tracking over the counter ingredients and increasing federal penalties for selling and smuggling the drugs(BH)
 * Section 213 of the act states that government officials can search the premises of any suspected terrorist without imminently notifying the home owner as long as nothing is removed(BH)
 * Senate Judiciary committee Chairman Arlen Specter says at the time of the acts renewal that he had deep reservations about the civil liberties impacts so he decided to compromise and say it was “an acceptable balance”(BH)
 * Republicans believe that this was the first step to analyzing the patriot act(BH)
 * Measures were revamped to throttle the use of National Security Letters to subpoena evidence by eliminating the one year period before gag orders on the NSL could b challenged in court, demand more evidence tying a party to foreign terrorist before records could b obtained from businesses, libraries, and hospitals, and finally to give the home owners a “sneak and peek” search warrant before they actually search the premises (BH)
 * Surveillance camera’s were placed at first ware locations were unknown and the reasons for them being there were un known until the reauthorized measures changed that completely and now camera’s and other surveillance equipment have to b approved and backed up with a good reason for being ware they go(BH)
 * The reauthorized measures also says that if your not of US persons the government has a right to trace and track you(BH)
 * Within 30 day s of the warrant being expired ,denied, or delayed the judge must report the fallowing-That the warrant was applied for, if the warrant was granted ,modified, or denied, the period of delay authorized by the warrant and the duration of and extensions, and the offence specified in the warrant or application(BH)
 * The bill also says that government can not access library records customer record medical records, or firearms sales records without the prior approval of the directors of the Federal Bureau of investigation(BH)
 * It also requires the Senate Intelligence committees regarding request for the production of tangible things to be sent to the judiciary committees (BH)
 * Also requires the attorney general each April to report to congress on the numbers of order applications made, granted, modified ,and or denied and the number of orders involving the making of tangible things from a library , records that involve the purchase of firearms, any health information , and tax payer return information(BH)
 * Section 8 authorizes that when someone is asked to provided certain records can say no and go to court and get it set aside if reason for being asked to provide the records is unreasonable(BH)
 * Section 9 terminates on December 31 2009(BH)
 * section 10 authorizes the Foreign intelligence surveillance courts to establish rules they feel is necessary and that abides to the power and responsibilities that they have (BH)
 * The original Patriot act was a massive revision of US law regarding intelligence gathering(BH)
 * Contained many tools that law enforcement professionals had lobbied for a long time(BH)
 * They wanted to punish terrorist(BH)
 * In October 2001 a letter was sent and ACLU urged law makers to vote down the final version of the bill(BH)
 * The American Civil Liberties Union believes that the act gives law enforcements to much power that is unnecessary(BH)
 * It violates our rights as citizens(BH)
 * The FBI’s technical support center that coordinates many of the governments surveillance programs gets a 200 dollar funding (BH)

Testimony on Information Sharing Provisions of the Patriot Act (sidebar)." //Issues & Controversies On File:// n. pag. //Issues & Controversies//. Facts On File News Services, 29 Apr. 2005. Web. 3 Dec. 2009. <http://www = [] >. = = = = Testimony on Information Sharing Provisions of the Patriot Act (sidebar) = = 1. The ACLU supports information sharing concerning terrorism to ensure investigators can and do "connect the dots" to prevent terrorist attacks, with appropriate safeguards required to protect civil liberties.  = =  2. The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the US discovered that before September 11th agencies weren’t sharing certain info to prevent terrorist attacks in a number of need to know cases.  = =  3. The information on sharing information are some of the most important provisions  = = 4. The ability to share critical information has significant altered the manner in which investigations are being done against preventing terrorist attacks = = 5. Since the p.a. has done the way terrorist cases are being conducted are much more coordinated and more effective approaching has been used = = 6. The Field offices note that with such effective working manner working with other agencies allow better focus and more open minded people on the case the better the output on the case. =
 * notes by:BB

"Surveillance Under the USA PATRIOT Act ." december 4th 2009 <http://www.aclu.org/national-security/surveillance-under-usa-patriot-act>.
 * The act violates the constitution because the 4th amendment says the government can not conduct a search without getting a warrant and a reasonable excuse that the person has committed a crime or will commit a crime
 * The act also violates the freedom of speech
 * The government uses wiretaps and search warrants to get evidence and they don’t have to let the people know
 * notes by: BH

Savage, Charlie. "Panel Votes on Patriot Act." __New York Times on the Web__ 9 Oct. 2009. 4 Dec. 2009 <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9902E0DC173EF93AA35753C1A96F9C8B63>. NATIONAL BRIEFING |  WASHINGTON; Panel Votes on Patriot Act // New York Times Article: October 9, 2009 //

Notes by: MS
 * Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation to renew three sections of the USA Patriot act
 * Those three sections were set to expire at the end of the year (’09)
 * Vote of 11 to 8 – sent bill to Senate floor
 * Bill would “extend provisions that expanded the power of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to seize records and eavesdrop on phone calls and email in the course of counterterrorism investigations”
 * Bill would also “impose stronger oversights on the FBI’s use of these and related powers”, by ways like requiring new audits by the Justice Department’s inspector general
 * Bill would cause some of the Patriot Act powers to expire after another four years if new laws were not made or act wasn’t renewed
 * This process makes sure that lawmakers keep an eye on how the FBI uses powers.

[]

USA Patriot Act: Pros and Cons Information about the Patriot Act Controversy
Pros: a. The p.a. streamlines communication for different agencies that can work together to prevent terrorism b. Provides for easier and less means of investigation, attacks, and surveillance c. the p.a. provides funding for victims of terrorist attacks and their families d. also providing funding for reconstruction of building that were torn down by terrorist attacks e. the p.a. is divided into 10 “titles” that help the government delineate new powers to facilitate the investigations for the government Cons: a. the government has power to look into personal info of people suspected of terrorism b. p.a. allows the government unprecedented monitoring of public library records notes by: BB

"By the Numbers: USA Patriot Act Update." //Issues & Controversies.// Facts On File News Services, 29 Apr. 2005. Wed. 2 Dec. 2009. <http://www.2facts.com/article/in100803>.

(From chart) · 3,000: Approx. the number of people killed in the terrorist attack Sept. 11, 2001 · 16: Number of USAPA provisions “set to expire by January 2006 if not renewed by Congress” · 54%: Number of people (poll respondents) who agree with USAPA and think that it is good · 28%: Number of people (poll respondents) who disagree with USAPA and think that it is bad · 35: “ Times the government has used the "library records provision" of the Patriot Act to access a wide range of information” · 155: “Times the government has used the ‘sneak-and-peak’ provision allowing authorities to secretly search a suspect's home”
 * As of April 29, 2005**

By the Numbers: Civil Liberties." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 9 Sept. 2005. Web. 4 Dec. 2009.<http://www.2facts.com/article/in101701>.

(From chart) · Approx. 3,000 people were killed in the terrorists attack on Sept. 11, 2001 · The FBI has used USAPA 35 times to get personal information · The FBI has never used USAPA to get information from libraries · 76% of poll respondents think that on public transportation, random searches of people’s bags and packages are necessary · 65& of poll respondents say that protecting the US from terrorism is more important than protecting civil liberties · 205 think that it is important to protect both the US and people’s privacy
 * As of September 9, 2005**

Jost, K. (2003, October 24). Civil liberties debates. //CQ Researcher//, //13// , 893-916. Retrieved December 3, 2009, from CQ Researcher Online, http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2003102400.

· US Officials believe that the actions taken to prevent future terrorism attacks are adequate. · In a series of speeches, Attorney General John Ashcroft said that, “we are winning the war on terror.” This was said in response to the criticism against the administration’s plans. · Assistant Attorney General Daniel Bryant believes that the precautions that are being taken are done “without having sacrificed any of our constitutional liberties and traditions.” · According to the chart, 65.9% are either very or somewhat concerned about if the actions and plans to fight terrorism have a negative effect on individual freedoms, while 32.2 % are not concerned at all. · 30.8% believe that the U.S. has violated legal rights; 57.8% believe the opposite. · 23.6% say that the government has gone too far “in using the laws that give the government more power to fight terrorism”, 49.2% say that the government has been about people’s rights, and 17.7% believe that the government has not gone far enough. · Many critics believe that the government’s actions to “roundup” Muslims and Arabs are repeated from shameful events in the past like the internment camps that Japanese-Americans were sent to during WWI · Many supporters believe that the government’s actions are not as severe as past events · Jeffrey Rosen, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School in Washington as well as the legal-affairs editor for //The new Republic// say that, “When we think about the greatest civil liberties victories since 9/11, most have come from Congress,” and “we [may] come to regret some of the laws and technologies established after Sept. 11. But I don't think any of them compare to the excesses committed after the previous wars.” · Paul Rosenzweig, senior legal research fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an adjunct professor at George Mason University Law School in Fairfax, Virginia says that, “another major victory is that we’ve gone two-plus years*, and it hasn’t happened again. We can be pretty darn happy that the Golden Gate Bridge is still standing, Mount Rushmore is still there, the Arch in St. Louis hasn't been bombed.” *this article was written on October 24, 2003 · In response to the critics saying that the sneak-and –peek provision is a violation to fourth amendment right, Heather Mac Donald, a senior fellow with the Manhattan Institute, a New York City-based conservative think tank writes that “these charges are nonsense. Critics of Section 215 deliberately ignore the fact that any request for items under the section requires judicial approval.” · Mincberg of People for the American Way says. “I support the idea. . . so that the president and Congress can debate it and make a conscious decision as to whether it's appropriate. We may well decide that it's not appropriate, but the advantage is that it brings the issue out in the open.” · In previous war situations, civil liberties had also been somewhat suspended · Pres. Lincoln had suspended the writ of habeas corpus 8 time during the Civil War · In 1996, there were people asking for stronger actions against terrorism, but were ignored even after two US facilities were attacked · In June, 1996, 19 Americans were killed after a truck bomb exploded outside of US military barracks in Saudi Arabia · In 1998, 224 people, 12 of which were Americans, were killed when bombs hit a US Embassy in Kenya and Tanzania · In October, 2000, 17 US seaman were killed when refueling their vessel, the USS //Cole//, in Aden, Yemen · With the Patriot Act, the penalties for terrorism-related offenses increased · USAPA expands the government’s powers to get records from businesses and other third parties through sneak-and-peak search warrants · The US argues that the president’s power as commander-in-chief to keep enemy combatants captured on US territory in a WWII decision involving Germans that were captured, were backed by the Supreme Court · Both Republicans and Democrats support the Patriot Act’s provisions and believe that none will be taken away any time soon · Liberty and security are not mutual, and the websites of the Justice department and the ACLU reflect that · The Justice Department’s website about the war against terror is www.lifeandliberty.gov · The ACLU’s website is www.safeandfree.org · 58% of people believe that the government is not violating any personal rights · 49% of people believe that government is correct in creating and using new laws to fight terrorism · Administration officials continue to believe that no person’s rights have been suspended Assistant Attorney General Bryant says that, “These reforms have been rooted in constitutionally tried and true, court-tested regimes.” · Civil liberties groups counter argue that people’s individual rights have been suffering and will continue to be infringed upon unless the administration changes something · Steven Shapiro, the ACLU's national legal director, says, “I do think the Supreme Court is very sensitive to its legacy and very reluctant to get itself in the position again of deferring blindly to the government during war and regretting it 20 years later.” Notes by: JP

Savage, Charlie. "Battle Looms Over the Patriot Act." __New York Times on the Web__ 9 Sept. 2009. 4 Dec. 2009 <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/us/politics/20patriot.html?_r=1>. Battle Looms Over the Patriot Act // New York Times: September 19, 2009 // Notes by: MS
 * Civil liberty groups and Democratic lawmakers supported putting more limitations on the FBI’s surveillance powers
 * Senators who supported higher privacy filed a bill to impose new safeguards and put greater restrictions on other surveillance policies
 * Bill co-sponsored by 9 Democrats and an independent
 * First provision (set to expire) – allows FBI to get “roving wiretap” court orders, letting them track a subject who switches phone numbers/phone companies without having to apply for a new warrant every time
 * Second provision – lets FBI seize “any tangible things” that are relevant to a terror investigation
 * Third provision – “lone wolf”: allows FBI to get a court order to wiretap a suspect who is has no connections with foreign terrorist groups/governments