- Forget drug-free and nuclear-free zones. A growing grassroots
movement seeks to make the United States a Patriot Act-free zone, one city
at a time.
-
- Or, at the very least, the people behind the movement
hope to make their cities constitutional safe zones.
-
- In the past two years, more than 300 cities and four
states have passed resolutions calling on Congress to repeal or change
parts of the USA Patriot Act that, activists say, violate constitutional
rights such as free speech and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
-
- Barring that, the resolutions declare that their communities
will uphold the constitutional rights of their residents should federal
law enforcement agents come knocking on the door of local authorities for
assistance in tracking residents. This means local authorities will insist
on complying with federal orders only in ways that do not violate constitutional
rights. The resolutions are not binding, however, and do not affect the
federal government's actions.
-
- The national movement was launched in 2001 by the Bill
of Rights Defense Committee, an organization led by activist Nancy Talanian.
Talanian first lobbied her community -- Northhampton, Massachusetts, a
town of 30,000 people -- to stand against the act in November 2001, when
few people had heard about the legislation.
-
- Talanian and fellow activists urged newspaper editors
to write about the legislation and hosted a public forum attended by 400
people, including Northampton's mayor and chief of police. Word spread
quickly to other communities, four of which passed their own resolutions
before Northampton passed its declaration the following May.
-
- Two years later, 322 municipalities and four states --
Alaska, Hawaii, Maine and Vermont -- have Patriot Act resolutions.
-
- Congress passed the USA Patriot Act swiftly in October
2001, 45 days after the Sept. 11 attacks, easing restrictions on the government's
ability to dig up personal information about citizens and non-citizens,
and obtain wiretaps and search warrants. Only one senator, Russ Feingold
(D-Wisconsin), and 61 House of Representative members voted against the
legislation.
-
- Under the act, federal investigators can obtain individuals'
library, financial, health and education records from cities while barring
municipal workers from letting anyone know authorities have seized the
documents. Officials can also monitor the activities of people who have
not been identified as suspects and search a home or office without prior
notice.
-
- The municipal resolutions, crafted individually by each
community, vary in language. They affirm, for the most part, that city
employees aiding federal authorities in national security investigations
will not violate the rights of people under investigation, such as monitoring
political and religious gatherings where people are engaging in activities
protected by the First Amendment.
-
- Hawaii was the first to pass a statewide resolution,
citing the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II as a motivating
factor.
-
- Talanian said fewer than five municipalities rejected
resolutions brought before them. These included Boston and Petaluma, California,
a small town north of San Francisco. Fairbanks, Alaska, did not pass it
initially, but has since approved it.
-
- Fred Hemmings, a Republican state senator in Hawaii who
voted against a resolution passed in his state, called the resolution a
political play by leftists bent on criticizing the government.
-
- "There are constitutional zealots that somehow believe,
especially in times of war, that some of our adversaries should be protected
by rights given to us by the Constitution," he said. "But the
people on the left are forgetting that we're fighting a war against a nationless
enemy. It has to be fought on completely new terms."
-
- He said although he has not read the Patriot Act in detail,
he believes "it does provide for adequate judicial oversight of any
intrusion into a person's personal life."
-
- But Councilwoman Kathy Lantry from St. Paul, Minnesota,
where a resolution passed 6-to-1, took issue with the interpretation that
only liberals are behind the movement.
-
- "There are many conservative councilors around the
country who have stated emphatically that there are many portions of the
Patriot Act that are in direct violation to the way that many of us thought
we do things in America," she said. "It's an easy out to say
it's just a liberal issue."
-
- Talanian said the community movements, which act independently
of her national group and draft their own resolutions, consist of coalitions
of disparate groups, from conservative libertarians to liberal civil rights
activists.
-
- "It's been very nonpartisan," she said. "There
have been mixtures of political parties, as well as peace and veterans
groups and student and faculty groups, working together."
-
- Although the resolutions don't carry official weight,
the communities say they hope to send a message to Congress to change or
repeal parts of the act.
-
- "Resolutions are powerful in that a city council
can tell employees in their jurisdiction how they will behave," said
Talanian. "They can say we don't want law enforcement to engage in
certain activities even if authorized by certain legislation."
-
- Although the resolutions don't prevent federal agents
from monitoring or arresting citizens on their own, Talanian said federal
authorities would be less likely to pursue surveillance without probable
cause, since they don't have the resources to pursue every person who interests
them without the cooperation of local law enforcement.
-
- "It might create some checks and balance by reason
of logistics or budget priorities for the FBI," she said.
-
- Councilwoman Lantry said no one should underestimate
the power local communities can have over how the federal government does
its work.
-
- "Maybe one tiny little city council in St. Paul,
Minnesota, isn't going to change the way this country does business, but
as others join in that cause, it will give pause to those passing policy
that perhaps they didn't think about, and need to think about, the negative
impact (of the legislation)," she said. "That idea -- that because
we can't have a direct impact we shouldn't say anything -- is not the way
our country works."
-
- Talanian said the community groups don't oppose all of
the Patriot Act's provisions. "We're not saying the entire Patriot
Act should be repealed but that certain sections need to be debated to
make sure people's rights are being protected."
-
- She pointed to the recent case involving Oregon lawyer
Brandon Mayfield, who was arrested by the FBI after it mistakenly matched
Mayfield's fingerprint to one found on a bag related to the train bombing
in Madrid.
-
- "Brandon Mayfield illustrates what can happen if
there are laws that are so elastic that they allow people to be picked
up and detained and have their houses searched and their careers harmed
using ways that are not effective for catching terrorists," Talanian
said.
-
- Some provisions of the Patriot Act will expire in December
2005. But the Bush administration and congressional allies have been pushing
aggressively to get Congress to null the expiration clause. In January,
President Bush called on Congress to renew the Patriot Act in his State
of the Union address. He has been urging the same in stump speeches on
his campaign trail.
-
- Attorney General John Ashcroft has said repealing or
changing the Patriot Act would hamper the government's ability to catch
terrorists and protect the public.
-
- But the government may be getting the message that citizens
are unhappy with the legislation. In March, Chuck Rosenberg, chief of staff
to James Comey, the second-highest official in the Justice Department,
told a reporter in St. Louis, Missouri, "We're losing this fight."
-
- Talanian said it's important for people to understand
that they, not just Congress, can and should participate in debates about
national security and legislation that will likely be around a long time.
-
- "Hopefully, the more communities pass resolutions,
(the more it) will help change the laws and make people more aware of what
their rights are and the importance of protecting them in the future, so
that a Patriot Act in a few years couldn't be passed quietly without being
read," she said.
-
- © Copyright 2004, Lycos, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,63702,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1
|
