The Washington Post today has an editorial on Ashcroft's PATRIOT Act tour: "Much of the criticism of the law has been shrill and ill-informed. It doesn't, as former vice president Al Gore suggested in a recent speech, let federal agents troop 'into every public library in America and secretly monitor what the rest of us are reading.' Such information can be gathered only in cases of national security, and with a warrant."
As I explained in my post yesterday, a PATRIOT Act Section 215 order is not a warrant. A warrant is issued by a court after the judge is satisfied, based on evidence, that there is probable cause. If the judge does not believe the evidence is sufficient, he or she has the power not to issue the warrant. A Section 215 order requires only that the government declare that the investigation if for a national security purpose. After that, the judge must issue the order. And unlike a warrant, Section 215 orders are forever secret, and the person who is served with one may not tell anyone they have been visited by the government or they will be thrown in jail.
As has been the case with alarming frequency recently, the Post is dead wrong.
Comments