|
Judge strikes down part of patriot act { September 29 2004 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/29/technology/patriot_act/http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/29/technology/patriot_act/
Judge strikes down part of Patriot Act
Court rules that a key portion of the Bush administration's security policy is unconstitutional.
September 29, 2004: 6:15 PM EDT
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - A federal judge ruled Wednesday that a part of the U.S. Patriot Act that allows the FBI to demand company records from businesses without court approval is unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Victor Marreo ruled in favor of the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the Bush administration's security policies on behalf of a John Doe plaintiff -- an Internet service provider company.
The legislation bars companies and other recipients of these subpoenas from ever revealing that they received the FBI demand for records. Marreo, who presides in New York City, held that this permanent ban was a violation of free-speech rights.
In his ruling, Marreo prohibited the Department of Justice and the FBI from issuing special administrative subpoenas, known as national security letters. But he delayed enforcement of his judgment pending an expected appeal by the government. The Department of Justice said it was reviewing the ruling.
The ruling was the latest blow to the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies.
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that terror suspects being held in U.S. facilities like Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, can use the American judicial system to challenge their confinement. That ruling was a defeat for the president's assertion of sweeping powers to hold "enemy combatants" indefinitely after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The FBI first received the power to get customer records in 1986 legislation, but its power to obtain confidential data was greatly expanded by the Patriot Act -- a controversial law the Bush administration pushed through Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks to help it battle terrorism.
The ACLU argued that the antiterrorism laws give the FBI unconstitutional power to demand sensitive information, without adequate safeguards for companies' rights.
The judge agreed, saying the provision "effectively bars or substantially deters any judicial challenge."
"Such a challenge is necessary to vindicate important rights guaranteed by the Constitution," Marreo said.
Under the provision, the FBI does not have to show a judge a compelling need for the records, nor does it have to specify any process that would allow a recipient to fight the demand for confidential information.
Prior to December, the letters could only be sent to certain financial institutions.
However, legislation signed by President Bush in December expanded the definition of companies from which information can be obtained and allowed FBI agents to send out the letters without first obtaining a judge's approval.
The legislation allows the FBI to seek information from businesses, such as insurance firms, pawnbrokers, precious metal dealers, the U.S. Postal Service, casinos, and travel agents.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- from staff and wire reports
|
|
