A Look at the Patriot Act, 
Nearly One Year Later 

STEPHANIE MILES / Wall Street Journal 5sep02

The antiterror measure had broad support in Congress, but drew heavy fire from civil-liberties groups. Here's a rundown of the act's key provisions and their impact on communications, the legal system and more.

KEY FACTS

• USA Patriot Act is an acronym for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.
• The law is 342 pages long and affects 15 different statutes
• Full text of the Patriot Act

VIEWS ON PATRIOT

• American Library Association www.ala.org/washoff/patriot.html 
• Electronic Privacy Information Center www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism 
• American Civil Liberties Union www.aclu.org 
• US Department of Justice Terrorism Information Page www.usdoj.gov/ag/terrorismaftermath.html 
• US Immigration and Naturalization Home Page www.ins.usdoj.gov/graphics 

The USA Patriot Act, the antiterror legislation passed last October in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington, gave sweeping new powers to federal investigators and prosecutors in a bid to improve their ability to root out and prevent terrorism.

It also raised concerns among civil libertarians, who feared that key rights, such as free speech and due process, would be trampled in a new law-and-order push.

The legislation dramatically increased law enforcement agencies' ability to monitor and arrest suspected terrorists by making it much easier and faster for authorities obtain wiretaps and warrants for e-mail messages and library, bookstore and banking records.

Nearly a year later, it is tough to gauge the success of the act for law enforcement -- and whether critics' concerns about potential abuses of the government's new powers were justified.

Here are some of the key provisions in the law, and the impact they've had so far.

Communications Provision: The law extends telephone monitoring laws to cover Internet communications -- including information about the routing of e-mail messages and a list of Web sites visited.

Significance: The law weakens the procedural hurdles that prosecutors must overcome to obtain permission to monitor e-mail and Web traffic, making warrants much easier to get. Previously, the government had to show probable cause that a crime had been or was about to be committed to obtain a warrant. Now, it only needs to show that the surveillance is relevant to a current investigation.

Impact: The Justice Department declined to comment on how the law has been executed thus far. Previously, the government has said that the new provision was necessary to address changes in electronic communication since the previous law was written, but civil libertarians and some legal experts are concerned that the privacy protections are being eroded.

"The existing law was written in the era of rotary telephones," said President Bush when he signed the Patriot Act. Now, he said, "we'll be able to better meet the technological challenges posed by this proliferation of communications technology."

Critics see troubling free-speech issues. "There is a likelihood of a chilling effect when people fear that the books they're taking out or a Web site they're visiting might be the basis for a profile that labels them suspicious," says Deirdre Mulligan, professor of law at the University of California at Berkeley and director of the law school's Center for Technology and Public Policy. When people understand that they are leaving a record easily available to the government, she says, "it could serve as a wakeup call."

Libraries Provision: The FBI can demand from bookstores and libraries the names of books bought or borrowed by anyone suspected of terrorism. Librarians may be prosecuted if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.

Significance: Library and book records were previously only available to prosecutors if a judge issued a subpoena for the records. The new rules override state privacy laws, according to the American Library Association, which believes the new surveillance measures "pose the greatest challenge to privacy and confidentiality in the library."

Impact: The FBI has conducted a search at one of every nine U.S. libraries since Sept. 11, according to a survey of over 1,000 libraries by the University of Illinois. Eighty-five librarians said they had been contacted by federal or local agencies with questions about library patrons.

Detention Provision: The Immigration and Naturalization Service can now detain aliens suspected of terrorism for a week before bringing criminal charges. The INS can hold terrorist suspects for up to six months without bringing charges if their country of origin won't take them back.

Significance: Civil liberties advocates say Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure are being violated.

Impact: As many as 1,200 people, many of whom were foreign nationals, had been detained between Sept. 11 and January of 2002, according to estimates by Amnesty International. In November, Attorney General John Ashcroft said that there were 548 people in custody on immigration-related charges, and that out of that group, 10 had been charged with federal crimes. The Justice Department declined to comment on how many people are in custody now.

Attorney-Client Privilege Provision: Jailhouse conversations can be monitored by federal prosecutors, and thus are no longer always subject to attorney-client privilege.

Significance: Defense attorneys say that the rights of their clients are being infringed. Previously, these conversations would have been considered privileged communication between attorney and client, and therefore off limits to prosecutors.

Impact: In April, Lynne Stewart, an attorney representing Sheikh Abdel-Rahman who is serving life in federal prison after being convicted in a 1993 conspiracy to blow up New York City landmarks, was charged with aiding terrorism by passing along information to his supporters after her conversations with Sheikh Abdel-Rahman were recorded. The Justice Department accused her of relaying messages to and from her client to a Muslim terrorist group.

Outlook The true impact of the Patriot Act will be difficult to measure until the government releases records detailing how many warrants have been issued and how many people have been detained and arrested since Sept. 11. The Justice Department says it is working on answers to 50 questions the House Judiciary Committee issued earlier this summer about how the new laws have been carried out. The responses, which answer questions such as how many subpoenas have been granted for records pertaining to library book check-outs, banking transactions, and e-mail messages, are due to released in a few weeks.

In the meantime, legal experts say, it is difficult to know if civil liberties are being violated or if the laws have helped to catch criminals or prevent another terrorist act.

"This is kind of one of those things where you figure, ignorance is bliss," says Jonathon Zittrain, an associate professor at Harvard Law School, who says that ordinary, law-abiding citizens probably have little reason to be concerned -- for now. "I hate to say it, but if you're not up to no good, then it's unlikely that [the Patriot Act's new powers] are coming after you."