220 likes | 398 Views
“The Sunset of the Patriot Act”. Professor Peter P. Swire Moritz College of Law Ohio State University Winter College February 19, 2005. Overview. Important parts of the USA-PATRIOT Act sunset (expire) on Dec. 31, 2005 This talk will focus on two topics:
E N D
“The Sunset of the Patriot Act” Professor Peter P. Swire Moritz College of Law Ohio State University Winter College February 19, 2005
Overview • Important parts of the USA-PATRIOT Act sunset (expire) on Dec. 31, 2005 • This talk will focus on two topics: • “The Wall” between domestic law enforcement and foreign intelligence • Broad new search powers for any records under secret search authorities • Theme: how to fight terrorism and update the laws while also preserving civil liberties
My Background • 1986: 4 years of law practice, with Congress and agencies • 1990: law teaching, at Virginia • Arrived at OSU in 1996 • Internet, privacy • Also, business law, banking, legislation, torts • 1998 book on U.S.-E.U. and privacy
Public Service • Early 1999, on leave from OSU to go to OMB, as first Chief Counselor for Privacy • Internet and privacy • Medical privacy rule (HIPAA) • Financial privacy rule (Gramm-Leach-Bliley) • International issues (agreement with Europe) • Government agencies, such as web sites
Updating Surveillance Laws • 2000: John Podesta asked me to chair White House Working Group on how to update surveillance & wiretap laws for the Internet • 14 agencies (many with 3 letters) • Our goal: preserve the historic balance where public safety is protected as well as privacy and freedom
Proposal of June, 2000 • Many of the issues later in the Patriot Act • My view: a balanced package • Updated authorities: “device” only applied to hardware for wiretaps, should be software,too • Updated privacy: strict rules already for phone wiretaps, and should be the same for e-mail • Rejected by House – they wanted more and stricter privacy protections
The Patriot Act • The attacks of September 11 • Bush legislation submitted Sept. 19 • Lots of our provisions • Lots we had considered and rejected • A few bad ideas eliminated by Congress • The main change by Congress – “sunset” the changes at the end of 2005, so we can re-examine this entire area with the benefit of experience • Overall, no privacy protections and 2-3X stricter than our 2000 bill
“The Wall” • Background on “the wall” • Constitution, 4th Amendment, apply in the U.S. for law enforcement purposes • No unreasonable searches and seizures • Wiretap laws are very strict, including notice to the target after the fact • Wiretaps only if a crime has been, is, or is going to be committed
“The Wall” • For Soviet spy, wait for the crime to be committed before wiretap? • No, so Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 1978 • Secret wiretaps for “agents of foreign powers”; special secret court gives them • That includes foreign terrorists
“The Wall” • Want to keep constitutional protections in the U.S., so created a “wall” between law enforcement and foreign intelligence • Secret taps in U.S. only if “the primary purpose” is foreign intelligence, such as spies • Police and prosecutors usually don’t get to use FISA material and FISA powers
Cracks in “the Wall” • CIA and FBI weren’t sharing information • That contributed to the failure to spot known terrorists on 9/11 • In general, line between “domestic” and “foreign” works less well in modern world of travel and the Internet • Therefore, push to bring down the “wall”
The Sunset and “the Wall” • Bush Administration proposed OK to do secret wiretaps (and give to cops) if “a purpose” is foreign intelligence • Congress said “a significant purpose” • One court made that test very easy to meet • Should we be worried?
Sunset and “the Wall” • Since 2001, number of FISA orders way up • A majority of all wiretaps in 2003 • Are we sliding into a secret wiretap system? • Less oversight by press, the target, or Congress • My view is that we needed updating for global realities, but need more checks and balances
Sunset and “the Wall” • My suggestion: • FISA wiretap only if the foreign intelligence aspect is enough to justify the wiretap • Can then also use for law enforcement • But the key is that a smidgen of foreign intelligence should not be the excuse for a secret wiretap; stop the slippery slope • My article at www.peterswire.net • Hearings this year
Section 215: Libraries and Gag Rules • FISA started in 1978 with wiretaps • What about the documents used by the spy or terrorist? • Section 215 of the Patriot Act allows judge to issue order for any records or tangible object • Not probable cause of a crime • Probable cause that is an “agent of a foreign power”, which is broadly defined
Sec. 215 and Libraries • You may have heard about concern from librarians about this new search order • Your library records to the police • 3 key points • Applies to all record-holders, including doctors, employers, banks, despite other laws • Is a federal crime for the record-holder to tell anyone that the search has happened • Access is to the database, so all persons’ records go to the government in the secret search
Sec. 215 and the “Gag Rule” • My biggest concern is that the library, hospital, or AOL cannot say anything about the search • Gag rule does make sense for wiretaps • They don’t work so well if you tell about it • No similar history for searches of houses or records
Sec. 215 and the “Gag Rule” • Imagine you are landlord or AOL, and request for records of John Smith • Is conspiracy or aiding & abetting to tip off John • But landlord or AOL can say, especially after the fact, that there was a search • AOL can say 117 searches this year • That right of publicity is a key defense against overuse of search powers
Sec. 215 and the Sunset • Almost no public discussion on Sec. 215 during passage of the Patriot Act • Librarians have helped make it an issue • An opportunity this year to revisit the issue • Have powers to get records where proper showing • Don’t create tool for secret snooping through all databases, about all persons
Concluding Thoughts • Even in 2000, clear that surveillance rules needed to be updated for new technology and global changes • 2001 and understandable reaction to the attacks • 2005 and our opportunity to seek security and civil liberties for the long haul
Concluding Thoughts • New Paul Rosenzweig book on Lessons from the Cold War • Heritage Foundation scholar (conservative) • Hard-headed about what it takes to confront enemies over a period of decades • To win for the side of freedom, we must continue to build freedom into the fabric of government and society
Conclusion: Dueling Quotes • Justice Robert Jackson: “The Constitution is not a suicide pact” • Ben Franklin: “They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security.” • How to achieve security, and liberty, in our current age?