City criminalizes
USA Patriot Act

A city in Northern California has passed an ordinance that criminalizes cooperation with the USA Patriot Act.

Arcata, Calif., outlaws Patriot Act

Arcata is one of more than 100 cities to condemn the federal anti-terrorism legislation, but its city council is the first to make it a crime for a city department head to voluntarily cooperate with “unconstitutional” arrests or probes under the act, the Associated Press reported.

The crime carries a fine of $57.

Arcata’s ordinance, passed 4-1, effectively is symbolic and would become moot if a court rules the act is constitutional. Nevertheless, the bill’s sponsor said it has drawn considerable attention.

“We knew we were doing something a little bit bold,” said Councilman Dave Meserve, according to the AP. “It certainly did not occur to me that it would catch the imagination of the American public.”

Opponents of the USA Patriot Act, including some conservatives and libertarians, contend it tramples civil liberties and eliminates checks and balances that prevent abuse. Robert Levy of the CATO Institute said, for example, “In effect, our government has exploited the events of Sept. 11 to impose national police powers that skirt time-honored constraints on the state.”

Supporters argue, however, no court has declared any part of it unconstitutional, and the new measures are necessary to help fight the war on terrorism.

“The Patriot Act has been an invaluable tool in the government’s efforts to prevent terrorist attacks,” said Justice Department spokesman Jorge Martinez, according to the AP.

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said in a statement Friday responding to local opposition, “Rather than serving as a menace to law-abiding U.S. citizens, it is credited with aiding a sting operation that apprehended alleged Islamic terrorists at a hotel in Germany, for example, as well as assisting the dismantling of alleged terrorist cells in Buffalo, Detroit, Seattle, and Portland. One of the suspected Portland terrorists reportedly was overheard complaining about the Patriot Act’s effectiveness in scaring away potential financial contributors who feared the new legal consequences.”

Martinez maintains the act is constitutional and applies only to people suspected of acting as agents of a foreign power or foreign terrorist groups.

Under the act – formally known as the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act – the federal government has new powers and authority to observe and search suspects through wiretaps and electronic and computer surveillance.

Local government opposition to the Patriot Act is building momentum, according to Nancy Talanian of the Northampton, Mass.-based Bill of Rights Defense Committee, who notes 52 resolutions passed in two months.

Cornelius Steelink, an American Civil Liberties Union member and main supporter of a resolution passed by Tuscon, Ariz., calls the act “a massive intrusion to our privacy” which he equates to “a serial rapist going through town.” Steelink is particularly concerned about a provision of the law he says permits the FBI to obtain from libraries lists of books a suspected terrorist has bought or borrowed.

Kyl insists this charge and many others are “nonsense.”

“The provision regarding libraries to which Mr. Steelink and others refer so ominously – section 215 – does not even mention the word ‘libraries,'” he said. “Nor does it allow the Justice Department to order any library or school to turn over its records. Section 215 does not apply to U.S. citizens or permanent residents, and only can be used in cases of suspected terrorism and where court approval is obtained.”

Vermont Rep. Bernie Sanders, an independent, has introduced a bill that would prevent judges from authorizing federal officers to search a patron’s library and bookstore records, the AP reported.

Sanjeev Bery, an organizer with the American Civil Liberties Union in San Francisco, said local efforts to thwart the act are making a difference. But the Justice Department’s Martinez insists the resolutions are “merely symbolic.”

“We haven’t had an instance where localities are not complying,” he told the AP.

Aracata, a coastal town of 16,000 about 300 miles north of San Francisco, has a left-leaning reputation in a largely conservative area of the state. In the early 1990s, it became the first city with a Green Party majority.