CITY CRIMINALIZES PATRIOT ACT
WorldNetDaily News Alert
Monday, May 19, 2003 - Evening Edition
New in today's Evening Edition:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE ...
City criminalizes
USA Patriot Act
Establishes fine for cooperating with feds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Posted: May 19, 2003
5:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
A city in Northern California has passed an ordinance that criminalizes
cooperation with the USA Patriot Act.
Arcata, Calif., outlaws Patriot Act
Arcata is one of more than 100 cities to condemn the federal anti-terrorism
legislation, but its city council is the first to make it a crime for a city
department head to voluntarily cooperate with "unconstitutional" arrests or
probes under the act, the Associated Press reported.
The crime carries a fine of $57.
Since federal law supercedes local law, Aracta's ordinance, passed 4-1, is
symbolic and would become moot if a court rules the act is constitutional.
Nevertheless, the bill's sponsor said it has drawn considerable attention.
"We knew we were doing something a little bit bold," said Councilman Dave
Meserve, according to the AP. "It certainly did not occur to me that it
would catch the imagination of the American public."
Opponents of the USA Patriot Act, including some conservatives and
libertarians, contend it tramples civil liberties and eliminates checks and
balances that prevent abuse. Robert Levy of the CATO Institute said, for
example, "In effect, our government has exploited the events of Sept. 11 to
impose national police powers that skirt time-honored constraints on the
state."
Supporters argue, however, no court has declared any part of it
unconstitutional, and the new measures are necessary to help fight the war
on terrorism.
"The Patriot Act has been an invaluable tool in the government's efforts to
prevent terrorist attacks," said Justice Department spokesman Jorge
Martinez, according to the AP.
Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said in a statement Friday responding to local
opposition, "Rather than serving as a menace to law-abiding U.S. citizens,
it is credited with aiding a sting operation that apprehended alleged
Islamic terrorists at a hotel in Germany, for example, as well as assisting
the dismantling of alleged terrorist cells in Buffalo, Detroit, Seattle, and
Portland. One of the suspected Portland terrorists reportedly was overheard
complaining about the Patriot Act's effectiveness in scaring away potential
financial contributors who feared the new legal consequences."
Martinez maintains the act is constitutional and applies only to people
suspected of acting as agents of a foreign power or foreign terrorist
groups.
Under the act - formally known as the Uniting and Strengthening America by
Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism
Act - the federal government has new powers and authority to observe and
search suspects through wiretaps and electronic and computer surveillance.
Local government opposition to the Patriot Act is building momentum,
according to Nancy Talanian of the Northampton, Mass.-based Bill of Rights
Defense Committee, who notes 52 resolutions passed in two months.
Cornelius Steelink, an American Civil Liberties Union member and main
supporter of a resolution passed by Tuscon, Ariz., calls the act "a massive
intrusion to our privacy" which he equates to "a serial rapist going through
town." Steelink is particularly concerned about a provision of the law he
says permits the FBI to obtain from libraries lists of books a suspected
terrorist has bought or borrowed.
Kyl insists this charge and many others are "nonsense."
"The provision regarding libraries to which Mr. Steelink and others refer so
refer ominously - section 215 - does not even mention the word 'libraries,'"
he said. "Nor does it allow the Justice Department to order any library or
school to turn over its records. Section 215 does not apply to U.S. citizens
or permanent residents, and only can be used in cases of suspected terrorism
and where court approval is obtained."
Vermont Rep. Bernie Sanders, an independent, has introduced a bill that
would prevent judges from authorizing federal officers to search a patron's
library and bookstore records, the AP reported.
Sanjeev Bery, an organizer with the American Civil Liberties Union in San
Francisco, said local efforts to thwart the act are making a difference. But
the Justice Department's Martinez insists the resolutions are "merely
symbolic."
"We haven't had an instance where localities are not complying," he told the
AP.
Aracata, a coastal town of 16,000 about 300 miles north of San Francisco,
has a left-leaning reputation in a largely conservative area of the state.
In the early 1990s, it became the first city with a Green Party majority.
----------------------------------
WorldNetDaily News Alert
Monday, May 19, 2003 - Evening Edition
New in today's Evening Edition:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE ...
City criminalizes
USA Patriot Act
Establishes fine for cooperating with feds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Posted: May 19, 2003
5:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
A city in Northern California has passed an ordinance that criminalizes
cooperation with the USA Patriot Act.
Arcata, Calif., outlaws Patriot Act
Arcata is one of more than 100 cities to condemn the federal anti-terrorism
legislation, but its city council is the first to make it a crime for a city
department head to voluntarily cooperate with "unconstitutional" arrests or
probes under the act, the Associated Press reported.
The crime carries a fine of $57.
Since federal law supercedes local law, Aracta's ordinance, passed 4-1, is
symbolic and would become moot if a court rules the act is constitutional.
Nevertheless, the bill's sponsor said it has drawn considerable attention.
"We knew we were doing something a little bit bold," said Councilman Dave
Meserve, according to the AP. "It certainly did not occur to me that it
would catch the imagination of the American public."
Opponents of the USA Patriot Act, including some conservatives and
libertarians, contend it tramples civil liberties and eliminates checks and
balances that prevent abuse. Robert Levy of the CATO Institute said, for
example, "In effect, our government has exploited the events of Sept. 11 to
impose national police powers that skirt time-honored constraints on the
state."
Supporters argue, however, no court has declared any part of it
unconstitutional, and the new measures are necessary to help fight the war
on terrorism.
"The Patriot Act has been an invaluable tool in the government's efforts to
prevent terrorist attacks," said Justice Department spokesman Jorge
Martinez, according to the AP.
Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said in a statement Friday responding to local
opposition, "Rather than serving as a menace to law-abiding U.S. citizens,
it is credited with aiding a sting operation that apprehended alleged
Islamic terrorists at a hotel in Germany, for example, as well as assisting
the dismantling of alleged terrorist cells in Buffalo, Detroit, Seattle, and
Portland. One of the suspected Portland terrorists reportedly was overheard
complaining about the Patriot Act's effectiveness in scaring away potential
financial contributors who feared the new legal consequences."
Martinez maintains the act is constitutional and applies only to people
suspected of acting as agents of a foreign power or foreign terrorist
groups.
Under the act - formally known as the Uniting and Strengthening America by
Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism
Act - the federal government has new powers and authority to observe and
search suspects through wiretaps and electronic and computer surveillance.
Local government opposition to the Patriot Act is building momentum,
according to Nancy Talanian of the Northampton, Mass.-based Bill of Rights
Defense Committee, who notes 52 resolutions passed in two months.
Cornelius Steelink, an American Civil Liberties Union member and main
supporter of a resolution passed by Tuscon, Ariz., calls the act "a massive
intrusion to our privacy" which he equates to "a serial rapist going through
town." Steelink is particularly concerned about a provision of the law he
says permits the FBI to obtain from libraries lists of books a suspected
terrorist has bought or borrowed.
Kyl insists this charge and many others are "nonsense."
"The provision regarding libraries to which Mr. Steelink and others refer so
refer ominously - section 215 - does not even mention the word 'libraries,'"
he said. "Nor does it allow the Justice Department to order any library or
school to turn over its records. Section 215 does not apply to U.S. citizens
or permanent residents, and only can be used in cases of suspected terrorism
and where court approval is obtained."
Vermont Rep. Bernie Sanders, an independent, has introduced a bill that
would prevent judges from authorizing federal officers to search a patron's
library and bookstore records, the AP reported.
Sanjeev Bery, an organizer with the American Civil Liberties Union in San
Francisco, said local efforts to thwart the act are making a difference. But
the Justice Department's Martinez insists the resolutions are "merely
symbolic."
"We haven't had an instance where localities are not complying," he told the
AP.
Aracata, a coastal town of 16,000 about 300 miles north of San Francisco,
has a left-leaning reputation in a largely conservative area of the state.
In the early 1990s, it became the first city with a Green Party majority.
----------------------------------
.