Court ruling against the Patriot Act is a victory for the Constitution and a rebuke of the Administration and Congressional supporters
http://www.dennis4president.com/go/newsroom/court-ruling-against-the-patriot-act-is-a-victory-for-the-constitution/"A federal court ruling striking down key provisions of the “USA Patriot Act” is “a major victory for the U.S. Constitution and the civil liberties of Americans, and a stunning rebuke of the Bush Administration’s abuse of power and of the Congress that permitted and reauthorized such abuses,” said Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich this morning.
Kucinich, the only Democratic candidate who voted against the original act in 2001 and its reauthorization early last year, said yesterday’s ruling “demonstrates that no official and no agency is above the law, and no member of the House or Senate who passed this law can escape responsibility for the Constitutional violations that have resulted.” “It is a matter of public record that the White House and the Justice Department have no respect for the Constitution or the rights and freedoms of Americans,” Kucinich said, “but this ruling also makes it clear that some members of Congress have been willing accomplices to these Constitutional abuses; and they have a responsibility to explain their votes.”
Yesterday’s ruling by New York U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero struck down various provisions of the act related to “national security letters” issued to telephone companies and Internet providers ordering them to turn over records without telling customers. The NSL’s do not require court review or approval and impose a gag order on recipients that makes it illegal to even acknowledge that they have received the order.
In his 106-page decision, the judge said Patriot Act provisions related to the letters are "the legislative equivalent of breaking and entering, with an ominous free pass to the hijacking of constitutional values."
He also wrote, "in light of the seriousness of the potential intrusion into the individual's personal affairs and the significant possibility of a chilling effect on speech and association - particularly of expression that is critical of the government or its policies - a compelling need exists to ensure that the use of NSL’s is subject to the safeguards of public accountability, checks and balances, and separation of powers that our Constitution “prescribes”. Marrero issued a similar ruling in 2004 regarding the original 2001 Act. His ruling yesterday addressed provisions in the amended Act that was reauthorized by Congress in 2006.
“Congress passed an unconstitutional and unconscionable law in 2001, and then, failing to recognize its mistake, re-authorized the law last year,” Kucinich said. “What makes this situation even more dumbfounding is that five Democrats who voted in the U.S. Senate to support that unconstitutional law are now asking to be elected President.”
Kucinich concluded, “If my colleagues had made the right decision in 2001 and in 2006, they would be in a better position today to claim they have the leadership, experience, and wisdom to be President. Their records, however, on this and other issues, such as the war in Iraq, tell a very different story.” 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
