Patriot Act: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Contemporary Issues in Criminal Justice CJA/310
Abstract
The terrorists’ attacks to the United States on September 11, 2001 effectively altered the mind set of the people of the United States of America. This fact ejected through the inception of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (PATRIOT ACT) signed by President Bush on October 26, 2001, a mere month and half after the attacks. The rather quick passing of this law offers much conflict because of the language and the function of the Act. Opposition of the Act argues that the Patriot Act threatens civil liberties, gives government officials too much power, and negatively effects foreign visitors and students. On the other hand, advocates indicate that the Act bestows law enforcement officers with an enhanced instrument that will combat money laundering. Moreover, the Act increases the enforcement of immigration laws and procedures, and closes the gaps of information sharing between law enforcement agencies. The analysis of the Act clearly indicates that although the Act was quickly consummated into inception, the law immeasurably ameliorates the power of law enforcement. However, the Act does demonstrate significant deficiencies in protecting the civil liberties and perhaps future amendments may need to be completed in order to maintain the law.
Patriot Act: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
The empowerment of law enforcement officials via the Patriot Act essentially improves the war against the terrorist. The money laundering provisions within the Act allows federal agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to investigate terrorists within our borders without eluding the probable terrorists to the investigation. The USA Patriot Act was a major contributor in the case of Sami Al Arian, an alleged U.S leader of the...