Civil Libertarians Praise Patriot Act Reforms, Sununu
WASHINGTON – Civil liberties advocates Wednesday rallied behind U.S. Sen. John Sununu’s decision to support two bills that would impose time limits on some of the most controversial provisions of the USA Patriot Act of 2001.
If passed, the bills would extend so-called sunset clauses – which terminate certain provisions of the law after a period of time – to parts of the law that have given the government sweeping new powers in executing search warrants, using wire taps, demanding access to business records and other controversial areas.
It would also limit how long law enforcement agents can delay notifying property owners after executing search warrants, eliminate the agents’ ability to get a wire tap without specifying the person and place to be tapped and limit the FBI’s ability to subpoena business records.
The American Conservative Union called the bills the most comprehensive attempts yet to reform the Patriot Act, while the American Civil Liberties Union praised the typically conservative New Hampshire politician for backing what they called a significant first step in bolstering constitutionally protected freedoms.
“This is a recognition by some very powerful, conservative Republican members of Congress that this law is a problem,” said Claire Ebel, executive director of the New Hampshire chapter of the ACLU, which has opposed many aspects of the Patriot Act since it sped through Congress in late 2001.
Both bills enjoy bipartisan support. One is sponsored by Sen. Larry Craig of Indiana, a conservative Republican, and the other by Sen. Patrick Leahy, a liberal Vermont Democrat. Craig’s bill is also co-sponsored by Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI), the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act.
But Ebel said the proposed laws are just a first step toward what she said she hopes will be complete repeal and re-evaluation of the Patriot Act.
“If it’s a good law, it will pass again,” she said, adding that many lawmakers didn’t have enough time to read the entire 400-page bill in the crush to pass it after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. “It was passed in haste. It was passed in secret. There are things in that bill that I would venture to guess even those senators and representatives don’t know about.”
But the bills’ backers made clear yesterday in a press conference that they had no intention of scrapping the entire law and that their efforts, according to Sununu, were just “an attempt to address concerns and weaknesses and vagaries in the original” law.
“We are going to refine the Patriot Act, not reject it,” said Sen. Mike Crapo, D-Idaho, another co-sponsor of Craig’s bill.
“I believe 90 percent of this bill made pretty good sense,” Feingold said of the original Patriot Act.
David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, a conservative lobbying group, also praised the bipartisan sponsorship of the bills.
“These are people who are now taking a look at it and saying much of this is a good law, but let’s make sure we didn’t go too far,” Keene said. “While the government should have all the power it needs to protect us, it shouldn’t have all the power it’d like to have,” he said.
Justice Department officials declined to comment specifically on pending legislation, but a department spokesman said, “It would be foolish to return to our pre-Sept. 11, 2001, level of vulnerability.”
“We can be both safe and free,” said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., another co-sponsor of Craig’s bill, “but we must be mindful.”
Added Sununu, “What we tried to do is sit down and put aside all the rhetoric and look at what the law really does.”
