Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this message. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7388717/ FBI seeks expanded search powers Justice Dept. also wants expiring Patriot Act provisions renewed NBC News and news services Updated: 12:16 p.m. ET April 5, 2005 WASHINGTON - FBI Director Robert Mueller on Tuesday asked lawmakers to expand the bureau�s ability to obtain records without first asking a judge, and he joined Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in seeking that every temporary provision of the anti-terrorism Patriot Act be renewed. �Now is not the time for us to be engaging in unilateral disarmament� on the legal weapons now available for fighting terrorism, Gonzales, for his part, told senators. He said that some of the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act have proven invaluable in fighting terrorism and aiding other investigations. �It�s important that these authorities remain available,� Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee. Mueller said sections of the law that allow intelligence and law enforcement agencies to share information are especially important. �Experience has taught the FBI that there are no neat dividing lines that distinguish criminal, terrorist and foreign intelligence activity,� Mueller said in his prepared testimony. He also asked Congress to expand the FBI�s administrative subpoena powers, which allow the bureau to obtain records without approval or a judge or grand jury. "For many years, the FBI has had administrative subpoena authority for investigations of crimes ranging from drug trafficking to health care fraud to child exploitation," he stated. "Yet, when it comes to terrorism investigations, the FBI has no such authority." 15 provisions at stake The Patriot Act is the post-Sept. 11 law that expanded the government�s surveillance and prosecutorial powers against suspected terrorists, their associates and financiers. Most of the law is permanent, but 15 provisions will expire in December unless renewed by Congress. On the same day Gonzales was speaking to the Senate committee, Sens. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., planned to reintroduce legislation designed to curb major parts of the Patriot Act that they say went too far. �Cooler heads can now see that the Patriot Act went too far, too fast and that it must be brought back in line with the Constitution,� said Gregory Nojeim, associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union�s Washington legislative office. The ACLU is part of an unusual coalition of liberal and conservative groups, including the American Conservative Union, that have come together in a joint effort to lobby Congress to repeal key provisions of the Patriot Act. 'Library provision' is controversial Among the controversial provisions is a section permitting secret warrants for �books, records, papers, documents and other items� from businesses, hospitals and other organizations. That section is known as the �library provision� by its critics. While it does not specifically mention bookstores or libraries, critics say the government could use it to subpoena library and bookstore records and snoop into the reading habits of innocent Americans. Gonzales told lawmakers Tuesday the provision has been used 35 times, but never to obtain library, bookstore, medical or gun sale records. But the criticism has led five states and 375 communities in 43 states to pass anti-Patriot Act resolutions, the ACLU says. Even some Republicans are concerned. Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., has suggested it should be tougher for federal officials to use that provision. Gonzales already has agreed to two minor changes to the provision, and was expected to support giving someone who receives a secret warrant under the provision the right to consult a lawyer and challenge the warrant in court. He was expected to also back slightly tightening the standard for issuing subpoenas. Bigger concerns Neither change addresses the central concern of opponents, which is that it allows the government to seize records of people who are not suspected terrorists or spies. Critics say the law allows the government to target certain groups, but the Justice Department counters that no Patriot Act-related civil rights abuses have been proven. Just in case, Craig and Durbin want Congress to curb both expiring and nonexpiring parts of the Patriot Act, including the expiring �library� provision and �sneak and peek� or delayed notification warrants. Those warrants � which will not expire in December � allow federal officials to search suspects� homes without telling them until later. The Justice Department said federal prosecutors have asked for 155 such warrants since 2001. That's just two-tenths of one percent of all search warrants, but their use is growing. The warrants were sought 47 times between the time the law was passed and April of 2003. Since then, it's been invoked 108 times. Gonzales also notes that the law has been used in non-terrorism cases. For example, federal officials used it to track over the Internet a woman who ultimately confessed to strangling a pregnant woman and cutting the fetus from her womb. And such searches have been allowed for years in drug and organized crime cases. _____________________________ Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or you can visit: http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news Go to that same web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe. E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few days will be deleted from this list. FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. I am making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.
