2 Patriot Act Provisions ruled unlawful

Post Reply New Topic

I am so proud this happened in my state!



2 Patriot Act Provisions ruled unlawful

Federal Judge in Oregon Rules 2 Provisions of Patriot Act Unconstitutional

WILLIAM McCALL
AP News

Sep 26, 2007 20:05 EDT

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."

Portland attorney Brandon Mayfield sought the ruling in a lawsuit against the federal government after he was mistakenly linked by the FBI to the Madrid train bombings that killed 191 people in 2004.

The federal government apologized and settled part of the lawsuit for $2 million after admitting a fingerprint was misread. But as part of the settlement, Mayfield retained the right to challenge parts of the Patriot Act, which greatly expanded the authority of law enforcers to investigate suspected acts of terrorism.

Mayfield claimed that secret searches of his house and office under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act violated the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure. Aiken agreed with Mayfield, repeatedly criticizing the government.

"For over 200 years, this Nation has adhered to the rule of law _ with unparalleled success. A shift to a Nation based on extra-constitutional authority is prohibited, as well as ill-advised," she wrote.

By asking her to dismiss Mayfield's lawsuit, the judge said, the U.S. attorney general's office was "asking this court to, in essence, amend the Bill of Rights, by giving it an interpretation that would deprive it of any real meaning. This court declines to do so."

Elden Rosenthal, an attorney for Mayfield, issued a statement on his behalf praising the judge, saying she "has upheld both the tradition of judicial independence, and our nation's most cherished principle of the right to be secure in one's own home."

Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr said the agency was reviewing the decision, and he declined to comment further.

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.

The Mayfield case has been an embarrassment for the federal government. Last year, the Justice Department's internal watchdog faulted the FBI for sloppy work in mistakenly linking Mayfield to the Madrid bombings. That report said federal prosecutors and FBI agents had made inaccurate and ambiguous statements to a federal judge to get arrest and criminal search warrants against Mayfield.

Source: AP News

Thats awesome!

hi Fuzzy!
haven't seen you around for a while. how's the family?

Merle

I usually don't like bagging other countries' governments, so if you don't mind me saying, IMHO anything called the Patriot Act or any similar name should be illegal (like if you oppose it you are not a Patriot? )

And Merle, aren't you in a Republican State? That's even more impressive

I doubt that it's over.

And Orygun is weird. There
are some very conservative
areas, and some pretty liberal
ones, but the overall tilt is towards
the left. And because there is little
in the center of the political spectrum,
the judiciary is actually fairly liberal.

Well. . .it is a mottled purpleish state ( combo of Red and Blue) you see, Calendale is right. . .we have Birkenstock(WITH SOCKS) Eugene right next to Cowboy boots Springfield, and Florshiem/forest worker cork boot Medford next to Birkenstock Ashland. . and straightlaced Salem near to let it all kick back Portland. . .
we are extreme, I will give you that. . . and it is not so much seperate ends of a yardstick, but more the opposite ends of a horseshoe. We love our rugged individualists here in Oregon.

Merle

and it is far from 'over'

is it actually off the law books yet?

not to my knowledge, "Hinc Illae Lacrimae"

Merle

There may be hope for America yet. It doesn't look like we're going to get much help from this next election though.

no republicans. please, smaller government? isnt that what they run off of? besides the moral family values thingy? give me a break.

i vote independent almost every election

then such a ruling is worthless.

It's worthless becase I don't know if it is off the books yet??

I don't my knowledge wheather it has or not has anything to do with it.

The executive branch has always been free to conduct illegal searches and the judiciary has always been free to throw out the results of those searches.

See also the ruling, an article on The Register and a CNN article.

And the executive has OFTEN been free to
ignore the judiciary. A precedent set by
the man on the 20.