Trying to decipher the ins and outs of the Patriot Act is a difficult task, even to experts.
This concept was at the center of the National Security and Civil Liberties Conference individual rights panel Saturday. The panelists also discussed issues of terrorist surveillance, law enforcement and the Terrorist Screening Center’s No-Fly List.
SMU graduate student Tammie Smith gained insight from the panelists.
“I thought that [the panel] was wonderful and helpful. The most interesting part was on the No-Fly Lists because I knew that this was happening but not to such a great extent,” she said.
An audience of about 40 gathered in the Meadows Museum Smith Auditorium to hear Rebecca Gregory, former chief of Anti-Terrorism and National Security for the U.S. Eastern District of Texas and two professors from the SMU Dedman School of Law: Jeffrey Bellin, an expert in criminal law and procedure who is a former prosecutor for the U.S. Attorney’s Office and Jeffrey Kahn, an expert on constitutional and human rights law as well as counterterrorism, speak. Journalist Lee Cullum, host of KERA’s “CEO,” moderated the three-person panel.
Each panelist gave a short presentation before the floor was opened for discussion and questions from the audience.
Gregory started the presentations with a look back to 9/11 and how it was an impetus for change in U.S. intelligence and security. She also gave a brief history of governmental spying and the implementation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”). According to Gregory, prior to 9/11, “the U.S. was trying to fight a 21st century war with tools from the 20th century.” Gregory said that there was an urgent need, after 9/11, to make immediate changes in our laws.
One change with the addition of Patriot Act was to tear down the “wall” that had previously kept U.S. foreign intelligence from communicating with U.S. foreign law enforcement. But this was only one change that came from the Patriot Act. Gregory also said that while it created some new laws, it also made amendments to many standing laws, making it more difficult to understand.
Bellin spoke about some of the problems that arose from the additions of the Patriot Act.
Bellin sees that “the Patriot Act exploits the new world in terms of privacy.” He used the example of law enforcement using delayed notice search warrants, which allows officers to search a house without ever telling the owner.
He said these practices are not used for antiterrorism and that the majority of these cases are used for drug searches, which have nothing to do with fighting foreign violence.
Bellin also talked about how the Patriot Act gives procedure for law enforcement to easily obtain warrants to wire tap phone lines and computers and questioned if some of the law changes could be overstepping personal privacy.
SMU senior, David de la Fuente, enjoyed hearing about the Patriot Act because it has affected his family personally.
“Some arcane parts of the Patriot Act have made it difficult for my mother to do things like reapply for her driver’s license,” he said.
The final panelist, Jeffrey Kahn, talked about the right to travel and terrorist watch lists, which also became much more prevalent after 9/11. Kahn presented the problem with the name-based No-Fly List, that there is more than one person with the same name, and commented that this has also expanded beyond its purpose.
Though the panelists spoke on serious topics affecting the U.S. and foreign terrorism, the audience laughed at each of the panelists’ humorous tidbits, keeping them engaged through the end of the question and answer session.
