Discussion Post
The USA PATRIOT Act is an acronym for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. It was passed in October 2001, following the September 11 terrorist attacks, and was reauthorized in 2006. In 2011, it was extended by U.S. president Barack Obama for another four years. The act permits federal agents to search homes and offices, bank accounts, and medical and library records, use wire taps, and read people's e-mail without their permission. Shortly after the act was passed, more than 1,000 Arab and Muslim men were arrested as terrorist suspects. Many were held without being told the charges against them.
In 2003, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed nine legal challenges against the PATRIOT Act, arguing that the act violates the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which permits searches only with a warrant. Supporters of the act point out that it does not make sense to warn possible terrorists that they will be subject to search and seizure. However, it is the potential for abuse that worries civil libertarians. Several colleges have protested the act, arguing that it infringes on academic freedom and privacy rights. More than 150 local governments, including at least three state governments, have passed resolutions condemning the PATIOT Act as an infringement on civil rights (Boss, 1, p. 406).
Ben Franklin once said that those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither. Is his position realistic in today's world?
Does the PATRIOT Act propose a threat to our civil liberties, or does it work to protect our civil liberties?
The response must include a reference list. Using one-inch margins, double-space, Times New Roman 12 pnt font and APA style of writing and citations.
Source
o Judith Boss. 2020. Analyzing Moral Issues (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education.