Fact Sheet From U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
On How the Patriot Act Deal With the White House
Falls Short on Protecting Freedoms
February 10, 2006
The White House has agreed to only a few minor changes to the Patriot
Act conference report -- the same report that could not get through
the Senate back in December. These changes do not address the major
problems with the Patriot Act that a bipartisan coalition has been trying
to fix for the past several years. Senator Feingold strongly opposes
this deal, and any reauthorization of the Patriot Act that does not
protect the rights and freedoms of law-abiding Americans with no connection
to terrorism.
Critical Areas Where the Deal with the White House Falls Short:
Section 215 (“Library and Business Records”)
This deal does not prevent the government from obtaining the
library, medical and other sensitive business records of people with
no link to suspected terrorists.
Background: The deal struck with the White House leaves this
provision unchanged from the conference report that failed to get through
the Senate in December. The Senate bill that passed by unanimous consent
in July 2005 would have ensured that the government cannot obtain the
sensitive, personal records of Americans with no connection whatsoever
to a terrorist or spy or their activities. The conference report replaces
the Senate test with a low standard – the records just have to
be “relevant” to a terrorist investigation, which is not
adequate protection against a fishing expedition.
Gag Orders
This deal does not provide meaningful judicial review of the
gag orders associated with Section 215 business records orders and National
Security Letters.
Background: People who receive demands for documents under
the Patriot Act are subject to a “gag order.” The deal includes
a provision allowing recipients of Section 215 gag orders to challenge
those orders in court, but it does not guarantee meaningful judicial
review. Under the deal, review of business record orders could only
take place after a year has passed and could only be successful if the
recipient proves that the government has acted in bad faith. The deal
ignores the serious First Amendment problem with the gag rule under
current law.
“Sneak and Peek” Searches
This deal does not ensure that when government agents secretly
break into the homes of Americans to do a so-called “sneak and
peek” search, they tell the owners of those homes in most circumstances
within seven days, as courts have said they should, and as the Senate
bill did.
Background: This provision remains unchanged from
the conference report that failed to get through the Senate in December.
| 