Guest Columnist — Gary Peck: Is Patriot Act endangering civil liberties?

Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 | 6:56 a.m.

Gary Peck is executive director of the ACLU of Nevada.

WEEKEND EDITION Nov. 15 - 16, 2003

Attorney General John Ashcroft misled Congress and the public. In the days and weeks following the horrifying events of 9-11, he led lawmakers and the rest of us to believe the Patriot Act would be used solely to defeat terrorism. That's not what's going on in Las Vegas. Here it is being used to investigate alleged political sleaze and to pry into the backgrounds of people who belong to homeowners associations.

According to recent reports, government officials employed the act to make a blanket request that financial institutions provide all records relating to the dealings of Las Vegans suspected of political corruption, as well as their personal and professional associates who perhaps had nothing to do with the activities in question. Under the Patriot Act, these requests weren't cleared with a court and it was illegal to inform the targets about them. As such, there was no opportunity for those being investigated to object to a judge or anyone else.

In the homeowners association case, the Act reportedly was invoked by its bank to demand the Social Security numbers, birthdates and driver's license numbers of all members having fiduciary responsibility for any of the association's accounts. These members were informed that the bank was required to look for matches with names on government lists of suspected terrorists, and also that they might be looking for other "derogatory banking activity."

Here, too, there was no judicial oversight and no notice to those targeted of any inquiries into their affairs. But because the bank's initial request for information was made directly to members, they could and did refuse to comply. What happened after that is anyone's guess, but it would be naive to believe the information wasn't forwarded to government officials who have an insatiable appetite for digging into matters properly left alone.

It is troubling that the Patriot Act is being used in cases where there wasn't a hint of terrorist activity. Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Shelley Berkley have expressed serious concern about it. While not yet calling for the immediate repeal of the Act's worst provisions, they have nonetheless added their voices to those of more than 25 million people who have helped pass anti-Patriot Act resolutions in over 200 communities and three states nationwide.

Given what we now know about how the Patriot Act was used in Las Vegas, and how it might otherwise be used here and elsewhere to snoop into the lives of people who clearly don't pose a terrorist threat, it is obvious that opponents' misgivings aren't misplaced. They aren't, as Attorney General John Ashcroft claimed, the "hysterical" rants of the uninformed. Instead, they are the healthy response of freedom-loving people to the genuine threat to civil liberties posed by a 340-page law whose full implications are still not entirely known.

If anything, there is more cause than ever for concern and for the kind of careful consideration and debate that never occurred when the Patriot Act was first passed. When he appeared before Congress shortly after 9-11 to lobby in its favor, the attorney general accused those who might oppose him of being unpatriotic and giving aid and comfort to America's enemies.

It was a tactic meant to intimidate, focusing as it did on the supposed need for enactment to defend against future terrorist attacks. Now, however, Justice Department officials disingenuously claim they always made plain their intention to use the Patriot Act for purposes having nothing to do with terrorism and therefore critics have no reason to complain when that happens.

Why would anyone defend a law that enables government to play fast and loose with the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Do we want lawmakers evading our system of checks-and-balances in their attempts to snag common criminals?

Are we prepared to live in a society where involvement in homeowners associations, the Boy Scouts, church groups, political parties, the Promise Keepers and all the other voluntary organizations that are the key to responsible civic participation exposes law-abiding people to government investigation? Is this the kind of massive invasion of privacy that lawmakers or unsuspecting Americans envisioned when the Patriot Act was rushed through Congress?

Nevadans from across the political spectrum have now begun a statewide campaign to defeat the Patriot Act's most onerous provisions. Supporters include groups as diverse as the ACLU, Nevada Eagle Forum, the Culinary Union, the Nevada Library Association and the Nevada Republican Liberty Caucus. These groups find much to disagree about, but they are united in their opposition to a law that's already shredding the fabric of our democracy without actually enhancing our security.

They and millions of others are sending a message to lawmakers -- roll back the Act's worst provisions now. If we wait until 2005, the damage to our core values and institutions may take years to repair.