PDA

View Full Version : The Pollution of Democracy-Section 213



elder999
10th July 2003, 00:44
Kendra Ellis did not think to note the details of the two Albuquerque Police Department officers who stood on her front porch. All she can remember with certainty is the last name of one of the officers, which was Trujillo, and his message.

“Trujillo said the entire household would be under surveillance under the new provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act,” said Ellis. “He said they will surveil us, and they don’t have to have a reason or documentation or a warrant or anything. They would do it for 15 days or until the protests stopped”

There is no legal basis for the officer’s statement, according to Peter Simonson, executive director of New Mexico’s ACLU.

“That’s and example of one of the collateral effects of the PATRIOT Act,” Simonson said. “As the culture of the act trickles down to local government, it is interpreted to mean local law enforcement is given carte blanche, especially where expressions of opposition to the government are concerned.”

Ellis had been one of more than 17 people arrested on the night of March 20, in the peace march gone wrong in Albuquerque. Witnesses of that night’s violence describe a police force out of control, firing rubber bullets and attacking people on the sidewalk. Ellis was the only protester who had a front porch visit from the APD, but others have said they saw police cars outside their homes for days afterward. Geoff Barrett, another protester who also garnered notoriety as on of the Albuquerque school systems teachers suspended for displaying student art with anti-war sentiments, said he observed daily police presence at his house. He also said he suspected that his house was broken into; the door had been jimmied, but all that was missing was a few political books.

If law enforcement used the new “sneak and peek” provisions of Section 213 of the PATRIOT Act to search Barrett’s home, officers might eventually show up to notify him that they did so-then again, they might not.

Under Section 213 Barrett would be notified “within a reasonable period,” which, according to case law, could be anywhere from seven to 90 days after the fact. The court can approve extensions of that reasonable period indefinitely, if there is “good cause shown.”

Before the PATRIOT Act, delayed notification was confined to very narrow circumstances. The standard method of search and seizure required “knock and notice,” in accordance with the Fourth Amendment.

Local FBI agents tell me they are still abiding by that Fourth Amendment requirement.

Section 213 is just one portion of the complex 342 page law called:
“Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism,”
which has outraged a diverse population. Civil and human rights advocates, Republicans and Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives, librarians and community groups have voiced opposition to the Act. Many of its provisions violate the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth amendments to the Constitution.

You should read it, especially if you live in the USA:

http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

koma
10th July 2003, 01:02
Aaron, I believe the PATRIOT ACT is the most frightening thing or government has ever created.
Why can't people see what's happening?

Shitoryu Dude
10th July 2003, 01:11
And people have the nerve to villify the ACLU because it sticks up for people and their constitutional rights.

:beer: