No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Extract
On January 20, 2004, during the State of the Union address, President Bush called for key sections of the USA Patriot Act to be renewed by Congress in 2005. When the president mentioned that provisions of the Patriot Act would expire at the end of 2005, there was applause from some Democrats. Then, when he called on Congress to extend the life of the Patriot Act, Republicans clapped enthusiastically.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2004 by German Law Journal GbR
References
1 President George W. Bush, State of the Union Address (Jan. 20, 2004) available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040120-7.html (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
2 Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, available at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ056.107.pdf (PDF File) and http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ056.107 (Text File) (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
3 President Bush said: “Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year. (Applause.) The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. (Applause.) Our law enforcement needs this vital legislation to protect our citizens. You need to renew the Patriot Act. (Applause.)” President George W. Bush, State of the Union Address (Jan. 20, 2004) available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040120-7.html (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
4 Assistant Attorney General Viet D. Dinh, Ordered Liberty in the Age of International Terrorism, Harold Leventhal Talk (June 7, 2002), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/leventhaltalk.pdf (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
5 Figures are available at http://lifeandliberty.gov/subs/a_terr.htm (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
6 The House of Representatives passed the Patriot Act on October 24, 2001, by a vote of 357 to 66, with 9 members not voting. 147 Cong. Rec. H7224 (daily ed. Oct. 24, 2001) (roll call vote 398). The Senate followed suit shortly thereafter, passing the act on October 25, 2001, by a vote of 98 to 1, with 1 senator not voting. 147 Cong. Rec. S11,059-60 (daily ed. Oct. 25, 2001) (roll call vote 313).Google Scholar
7 Press Release, U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Sensenbrenner Statement and Release of Justice Department's Answers to USA-PATRIOT Act Oversight Questions (Oct. 17, 2002), available at http://www.house.gov/judiciary/news101702.htm (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
8 E.g., Dan Eggen, Patriot Monitoring Claims Dismissed; Government Has Not Tracked Bookstore or Library Activity, Ashcroft Says, Wash. Post at A2 (Sept. 19, 2003).Google Scholar
9 The Attorney General's Guidelines On General Crimes, Racketeering Enterprise And Domestic Security/Terrorism Investigations 7 (2002), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/generalcrimes2.pdf (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
10 See 149 Cong. Rec. H7299 (daily ed. July 22, 2003) (roll call vote 408).Google Scholar
11 149 Cong. Rec. H7289 (daily ed. July 22, 2003). Specifically, the amendment provided: “None of the funds made available in this act may be used to seek a delay under Section 3103a(b) of title 18 United States Code.” Id.Google Scholar
12 Dalia v. United States, 441 U.S. 238, 247 (1979).Google Scholar
13 United States v. Banks, 124 S. Ct. 521 (2003).Google Scholar
14 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-511, 92 Stat. 1783 (codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq. (2004)), available at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/ch36.html (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
15 Humanitarian Law Project v. Ashcroft, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 926 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2004), available at http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/terrorism/hlpash12304ord.pdf (last viewed Feb. 9, 2004).Google Scholar
16 Karl Llewellyn, On What Is Wrong With So-Called Legal Education, 35 Colum. L. Rev. 651, 662 (1935).Google Scholar