Archives
August 2004
8/30/04
8/29/04
8/24/04
8/16/04
8/14/04
8/13/04
8/11/04
8/6/04
8/4/04
8/3/04
8/2/04
8/1/04
8/1/04
Critics of Counterterrorism Statutes
Sunday, August 1, 2004
In the Sovereign Society Offshore A-Letter, former congressman Bob Bauman criticizes the ‘Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Tools Improvement Act’ [LINK]. Without taking a position on the Act itself, there are two specific issues I have with Bauman’s commentary.
First, as happened with the Patriot Act, critics claim that the Congress has insufficiently reviewed this new bill. Specifically with the Patriot Act, a source directly involved with the passage of that bill advised me that the individual proposals compiled in the bill had been made to the Congress and were subject to committee work for years before they were passed in the Patriot Act. Further, it took the 9-11 attacks to get the Congress to move on these proposals, which had been developed based upon field experience in counterterrorism. Knowing that proposals for this new bill have been in the works for years, I suspect that again individual proposals have been the subject of committee review before the final bill was written.
Second, Bauman claims that provisions of the Act subvert 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizure. However, despite congressional pretensions, the courts have been clear that they will not permit the Congress to amend the Constitution by statute; therefore, the proposals may be unconstitutional, but they can not alter our fundamental rights. At most, the Congress can change procedural rights established by prior statutes; for example, the Congress could modify protections in the Privacy Act without impacting fundamental rights. Contrary to Bauman's assertion, in the end all executive acts can be subject to congressional and court oversight.
jwoodswce at 10:04:00 AM EDT Blog about this entry |
Add to del.icio.us | 
digg this
Critics of Counterterrorism Statutes
In the Sovereign Society Offshore A-Letter, former congressman Bob Bauman criticizes the ‘Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Tools Improvement Act’ [LINK]. Without taking a position on the Act itself, there are two specific issues I have with Bauman’s commentary.
First, as happened with the Patriot Act, critics claim that the Congress has insufficiently reviewed this new bill. Specifically with the Patriot Act, a source directly involved with the passage of that bill advised me that the individual proposals compiled in the bill had been made to the Congress and were subject to committee work for years before they were passed in the Patriot Act. Further, it took the 9-11 attacks to get the Congress to move on these proposals, which had been developed based upon field experience in counterterrorism. Knowing that proposals for this new bill have been in the works for years, I suspect that again individual proposals have been the subject of committee review before the final bill was written.
Second, Bauman claims that provisions of the Act subvert 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizure. However, despite congressional pretensions, the courts have been clear that they will not permit the Congress to amend the Constitution by statute; therefore, the proposals may be unconstitutional, but they can not alter our fundamental rights. At most, the Congress can change procedural rights established by prior statutes; for example, the Congress could modify protections in the Privacy Act without impacting fundamental rights. Contrary to Bauman's assertion, in the end all executive acts can be subject to congressional and court oversight.
jwoodswce at 10:04:00 AM EDT Blog about this entry |
Add to del.icio.us | digg this
