Pruning the Patriot Act
CONGRESS APPROVED the USA Patriot Act in a flush of fear following the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, but it had the good sense to put a time limit on many of the most controversial sections so they expire next Dec. 31. It ought to assess their effectiveness and potential for abuse rather than toughening the act, as one influential senator proposes.
Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, wants to expand the ability of the FBI to use search warrants issued by a secret intelligence court. Under Roberts's plan, the agents could use this authority to look for evidence of crimes unrelated to the purpose of the warrants.
Roberts would also allow FBI agents to write their own subpoenas without having to get permission from a judge. And the FBI would be able to order the US Postal Service to provide copies of envelopes addressed to or sent from people linked to national security investigations.
Neither Roberts nor the FBI has yet made the case that these powers are essential to thwart terrorism. The senator's attempt to attach them to renewal of the Patriot Act has diverted attention from more pressing matters, such as whether this sprawling piece of legislation has been effective and whether it infringes on Americans' liberties.
In ''Rethinking the Patriot Act," a study to be released this week by the Century Foundation in New York, legal scholar Stephen J. Schulhofer concludes that while some sections of the law are useful, its implications for civil liberties are troubling and its impact on terrorism is unclear.
Schulhofer joins many librarians who worry that enhanced search powers for documents allows government agents to rummage through Americans' private records, including the books they borrow. No doubt most federal agents will use common sense when seeking this information, but the risk of abuse is still too high for this section to remain in effect.
Roberts's committee, which was drafting its version of a Patriot Act extension yesterday, will not have the last word on revising the law; the House has yet to prepare its own proposal. Congress ought to be pruning unnecessary, intrusive sections instead of adding more threats to personal liberty.
Congress passed the Patriot Act in a climate of understandable urgency. Schulhofer concludes that ''legal limitations bear little if any of the blame for Sept. 11." With the advantage of hindsight and with adequate time to deliberate, Congress has an important chance to get it right this year.
