Three sections of the U.S. Patriot Act — the infamous piece of legislation that expanded government surveillance — are set to expire at the end of this year. This week, both the House and Senate will hold hearings to determine whether or not to extend provisions that allow investigators to eavesdrop on phone calls and seize personal evidence should be extended.
Although we are wary of any kind of reauthorizations that have the potential to breach privacy, we hope the House and Senate take advantage of this opportunity to closely examine the necessity of certain provisions of the Patriot Act.
This is the first real opportunity lawmakers have had to closely consider certain provisions since the Patriot Act was created shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The smoke has cleared, and now lawmakers can look at the Patriot Act with, hopefully, level heads.
The first provision up for renewal is the “roving wiretap,” which allows investigators to continue tapping a target despite changes in phone numbers or phone companies. The second provision allows the FBI to seize “any tangible things” that might prove relevant in a terrorism investigation, such as a suspect’s diary or personal computer.
We understand how these provisions might be necessary in certain investigations, but we would hope lawmakers can “tighten up” certain parts of the Patriot Act, essentially requiring stronger evidence to prove that certain suspects are worth targeting. There’s no doubt some Americans have had their privacy invaded for no good reason, so we hope the government can find a way only to target those with enough probable cause to warrant surveillance.
One provision we do not support, however, is the “lone wolf” provision, which allows the FBI to wiretap terrorism suspects not connected to any foreign terror groups or governments. This provision never has been used, which only should illustrate the fact that it is not necessary.
Many Americans do not support the Patriot Act out of principle and think the government unlawfully invades the privacy of countless Americans just because it can. Although, like any law, certain parts of the Patriot Act have been abused, some types of surveillance simply are necessary to provide enough evidence for prosecution.
It falls to the government to quell citizens’ fears about unlawful surveillance and the invasion of their privacy. The vast majority of Americans have nothing to fear, but the government could do a better job of addressing concerns and educating citizens on why certain provisions of the act is necessary.
Although it’s unlikely the Patriot Act will be done away with any time soon, this is the perfect opportunity for the government to closely examine and reevaluate the effectiveness and necessity of the Patriot Act. They should take care to fix any flaws as well and possibly add more restrictions to provisions, ensuring that Americans’ privacy is invaded only when absolutely necessary.
Support student media!
Please consider donating to The State News and help fund the future of journalism.
Discussion
Share and discuss “Patriot Act deserves review before renewal” on social media.
