Some people were unhappy with the Patriotic Act provisions because of several reasons. Many of them felt that this Act would make them be investigated for what they read and write as well as the websites they visit. As a matter of fact, they thought that the Feds would “gag” their bank, their librarian, and their Internet Service Provider, stopping them from telling them if they were under investigation (Marcovitz, 2008).
They also thought that the Feds would not even require showing any reasonable suspicion, leave alone “probable cause in gaining access to their records. Because they could be investigated without their knowledge, they thought that they would have no means to challenge any illegitimate searches. Other opposed this Act from the p0int that if the law were used in foiling terrorist plots, the Administration would boast about such situations. Rather, foiled terrorist plots are always sting operations using undercover operatives as well as informants. Some people were also not sure on if there was a reason to doubt whether protecting people from terrorism was ever the Act’s real purpose. The reason was that the expanded wiretap, as well as search authority, was used in ordinary domestic criminal investigations, not just during terror cases they viewed the executive branch as having a “secret” interpretation of this Act that was inconsistent with its plain reading. Prior the attacks, the Patriot Act would not have been passed. The reason is that attacked on the First Amendment and undermined the Fourth Amendment. Hence, it would have been perceived as attacking people’s freedom, values, and their way of life (Smith & Hung, 2010).
Marcovitz, H. (2008): Privacy rights and the Patriot Act. Edina, MN: ABDO Pub. Co.
Smith, C. S., & Hung, L.-C (2010): The Patriot Act: Issues and controversies. Springfield, Ill: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.