 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
What's at issue in the antiterrorism billBy JOHN BALZ
© St. Petersburg Times, WASHINGTON -- Congressional members are raising doubts about roughly half of the 53 provisions in an antiterrorism package Attorney General John Ashcroft delivered last week. Known as the Mobilization Against Terrorism Act, the bill would grant Department of Justice officials broader powers to investigate and prosecute suspected terrorists. Lawmakers are questioning whether such changes would come at the expense of the Bill of Rights. Key areas of disagreement between the Justice Department and Congress: Updating laws to allow the monitoring of all communications devices used by an individual. Now, federal agencies must submit separate requests to monitor each device. Designed to help law enforcement deal with the reality of cell phones and e-mail, this provision has created much concern about the potential loss of electronic privacy. Allowing the U.S. government to detain foreign terrorist suspects and deport them without presenting evidence. This is the most controversial of the department's requests. Key Democrats such as Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, wonder how law enforcement agents can fairly and accurately determine who is part of a terrorist plot. Under the Justice Department proposal, suspects could be detained for an indefinite period and allowed to appeal only after they had been removed from the country. Granting government authority to subpoena "tangible things (including books, records, papers and documents) that are relevant" to a terrorism investigation. The department has described the provision as one that applies to business records, but privacy groups argue it could be easily abused by over-aggressive law enforcement agents. Having American courts accept information obtained about an American by a foreign government's electronic surveillance. Legal scholars worry whether allowing the sharing of such information would be a violation of the Constitution. As currently interpreted, the collection of such evidence constitutes illegal search and seizure. Granting the president authority to confiscate domestic assets of those suspected in "attacks against the United States." Some lawmakers argue that the president already has substantial power to take away assets and that Ashcroft's proposal would allow the use of secret evidence. Key areas of agreement between the Justice Department and Congress: Expanding the definition of a terrorist to include those who support terrorist activities by providing money, shelter or other assistance. Extending the length of time the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court can keep tabs on suspected terrorists. Lifting the measure that prevents prosecution of terrorism crimes five years after they occur. Requiring cable companies, telephone companies and Internet service providers to comply with the same rules for obeying court orders about the release of personal information. Law enforcement could also subpoena the information in "emergency situations" without asking for a judge's permission. Increasing the penalties against those who use chemical and biological agents without the proper certification.
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
From the Times wire desk
From the AP |
