BEFORE the Patriot Act (BPA), there was such a thing as "probable cause" ... for many hard-fought historical reasons.
The requirement of the need for "probable cause" before invading another citizen's personal space, was established by the Fourth Amendment of the American Constitution.
The Fourth Amendment
by Tom Head, About.com Guide
[...]
Writs of Assistance:
The Fourth Amendment was written directly in response to British general warrants (called Writs of Assistance), in which the Crown would grant general search powers to British law enforcement official. These officials could search virtually any home they liked, at any time they liked, for any reason they liked or for no reason at all.
[...]
The Exclusionary Rule:
In Weeks v. United States (1914), the Supreme Court established what has been known as the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule states that evidence obtained through unconstitutional means is inadmissible in court and cannot be used as part of the prosecution's case. Before Weeks, law enforcement officials could violate the Fourth Amendment without being punished for it, secure the evidence, and use it at trial. The exclusionary rule establishes consequences for violating a suspect's Fourth Amendment rights.
Warrantless Searches:
The Supreme Court has held that searches and arrests can be performed without a warrant under some circumstances. Most notably, arrests and searches can be performed if the officer personally witnesses the suspect committing a misdemeanor, or has reasonable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a specific, documented felony.
AFTER the Patriot Act (APA), this thing called "probable cause" was discarded ... like last month's newspapers.
Who needs to worry about possible "Government Overreach" -- when we have Terrorists lurking around in every Chat Room, and combing the stacks in every Library?
The Patriot Act: Probable Cause and Due Process
by Charles Montaldo, About.com Guide
[...]
The Patriot Act basically extends the government's foreign intelligence surveillance powers over potential "domestic" terrorists, including American citizens. Several of its more controversial provisions include:
-- Federal agents may conduct surveillance and searches against U.S. citizens without "probable cause" to suspect criminal activity. The targeted person is not notified and cannot challenge the action.
-- Agents can conduct "sneak-and-peek" searches without prior notice in common domestic crime investigations. Before the Patriot Act, courts required law enforcement to "knock and announce" themselves before conducting searches.
-- Government agents now have access to any person's business or personal records. These include library records, book-buying habits, medical, marital counseling or psychiatric files, business records, Internet habits, and credit reports.
-- The government no longer has to give notice, obtain a warrant or a subpoena, or show probable cause that a crime has been committed. Persons turning over personal data to the government (such as librarians, co-workers or neighbors) are prohibited, under threat of federal criminal prosecution, from telling anyone they did so.
"The government no longer has to give notice, obtain a warrant or a subpoena, or show probable cause that a crime has been committed." Thanks to the hastily formulated Patriotic Act, they can now
just assume were all Guilty --
and let the NSA Data-mining Protocols sort it all out later.
What ever could go wrong, in a (APA) world where you had better be ready to prove you're Innocent? Innocent of whatever the A.I. program says you did; Or says that "you are about to do" ...
Computers NEVER foul up, do they? Not in our lifetimes. Nah Never. No one hardly even notices when they do. If it does, just kick the dang thing, or as a last resort: Reboot.
BEFORE the Patriot Act (BPA), we as Americans were protected against something called "unreasonable searches and seizures."
It was in our Constitution. It was once paramount. How quaint of those darn Founders eh?
unreasonable search and seizure
legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com
unreasonable search and seizure noun.
search of an individual or his/her premises (including an automobile) and/or seizure of evidence found in such a search by a law enforcement officer without a search warrant and without "probable cause" to believe evidence of a crime is present. Such a search and/or seizure is unconstitutional under the 4th Amendment (applied to the states by the 14th Amendment), and evidence obtained thereby may not be introduced in court.
AFTER the Patriot Act (APA), this thing called "unreasonable searches and seizures" became just so much "collateral damage" ... another regrettable consequence of the hunt for bin Laden; it's price we pay for this tribute-to-the-ages 'War on Terror.'
The Pre-Terror Task Force needs "its tools" you know. Heck, they know what you're going to do -- even before you do, yourself. They're that good.
Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional
AP; nbcnews.com -- 9/27/2007
PORTLAND, Ore. — Two provisions of the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional because they allow search warrants to be issued without a showing of probable cause, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as amended by the Patriot Act, "now permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment."
[...]
Received apology from FBI
Mayfield, a Muslim convert, was taken into custody on May 6, 2004, because of a fingerprint found on a detonator at the scene of the Madrid bombing. The FBI said the print matched Mayfield's. He was released about two weeks later, and the FBI admitted it had erred in saying the fingerprints were his and later apologized to him.
Before his arrest, the FBI put Mayfield under 24-hour surveillance, listened to his phone calls and surreptitiously searched his home and law office.
[...]
"Oops, sorry about that chief. Mistakes happen. Computer-glitches, you know.
Endless Bureaucratic Foobar; What are ya gonna do?"
Next!
Key Part of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional
Internet Providers' Data at Issue
by Dan Eggen, Washington Post staff sriter -- Sep 30, 2004
A federal judge in New York ruled yesterday that a key component of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional because it allows the FBI to demand information from Internet service providers without judicial oversight or public review.
[...]
The ultimate impact of Marrero's order is unclear. In addition to having time to pursue an appeal, the government will view the ruling as applying only to New York's Southern District in Manhattan, legal experts said. [...]
But the ACLU argues that Marrero's ruling is a warning to the government about some of its tactics in the war on terrorism.
"This is a wholesale refutation of the administration's use of excessive secrecy and unbridled power under the Patriot Act," said Ann Beeson, an ACLU lawyer. "It's a very major ruling, in our opinion."
[...]
Next!
I'm guessing given current Internet Events, somewhere along the After-the-Patriot-Act line, someone saw fit to overturn that New York Judge's BPA Ruling (Before-the-Patriot-Act). Isn't it "quaint" how some BPA Reporters used to follow this beat -- as if 'Big Issues' still needed to be debated and decided, as a nation?
I wonder how long before someone has the bright idea, to re-calibrate our Calendars. That would only be fitting; A fitting tribute to how our world as we once knew it -- is gone. It was totally transformed; re-calibrated to meet the depths of our unimaginable Fears -- that old world is history, never to be seen again, in our fearsome lifetimes.
Pining away for the old days, they will one day call it, just so-much "Wishful 'pre-crime' assumed-innocent thinking." A longing nostalgia for something we never really needed in the first place (an elite league of special counsel neo-lawyers will argue.) Let go of old Security-Blankets citizen; embrace the new ones instead Americans -- Afterall, they've got you covered.
-- And given "the urgency" of our super-charged, always-on 24/7 Current Events Machine those BPA rules rarely get brought up anymore. That's just the price we pay for this knows-no-bounds never-to-end, you-got-nothing-to-worry-about 'War on Terror.'
Kind of oxymoronic, ain't it? But Hey! -- that's what living on hyper-steroids, will do to a Constitution ...
Next!