During the weeks immediately following the 9/11 attacks, comprehensive legislation designed to close the well-known loopholes in America's existing security laws was drafted in the form of the Patriot Act, which passed with a lone dissenting vote in the Senate and a mere 66 (out of 435) dissenting votes in the House of Representatives. It was signed into law by President Bush on October 26, 2001. The name "Patriot Act" given to this legislation is an acronym for "Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism."

The Patriot Act was not a dramatic departure from existing legislation, but can be more accurately described as the extension of laws and the implementation of reforms long recommended by the security and intelligence communities. The key provisions of the  Act are actually incorporated from an anti-terrorism measure proposed by the Clinton Administration and adopted by Congress in 1996. This was the "Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996," which was inspired by the worst terrorist atrocity on American soil up to that time -- the April 1995 bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City by Timothy McVeigh, which killed 175 innocent people. 

The 1966 Act contained a number of key provisions to combat terrorism, but three in particular inspired the formation of a coalition against the legislation: the provision making it criminal to provide "material support" or "expert advice or assistance" to terrorist groups; the provision allowing the use of secret evidence in terrorism cases; and the provision authorizing the U.S. Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Attorney General to jointly designate organizations as terrorist groups based upon available evidence. 

The most influential civil liberties voices and groups in the United States lamented that the rights of all Americans were under assault by a government that was seeking not only empire abroad, but totalitarian control at home. 
 
These same criticisms would eventually be aimed at the Patriot Act, which was designed to avoid future recurrences of 9/11 by removing the procedural shackles that had previously prevented authorities entrusted with protecting American lives from doing their job with maximum effectiveness. The Act's terms were not nearly as harsh as certain security measures that had been imposed during previous times of national crisis -- measures such as President Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War and President Franklin Roosevelt's internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Its enforcement provisions were made subject to judicial review and required judicial writs and warrants to authorize them.

The Patriot Act became the cornerstone of America's domestic security program. Most significantly, it removed several Clinton-era restrictions that had erected walls of separation between intelligence officials and law-enforcement officials from sharing information and working together on investigations -- even if they were both trailing the same suspect who was plotting a terrorist act. This restriction had effectively crippled the government's ability to fight terrorism, and contributed to the government's failure to avert the 9/11 attacks.

The Patriot Act also gave the Treasury Department more leverage with which to disrupt terrorist financing networks; it gave the Attorney General slightly more authority to detain and deport suspected terrorist aliens; it allowed law-enforcement officials to obtain a single search warrant covering any and all localities where they suspected terrorist activity might occur (rather than having to go through the time-consuming process of obtaining separate warrants for each location); and it increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes or harbor terrorists.

Supporters call the Patriot Act an indispensable tool for ensuring the safety of Americans. Critics have characterized the Patriot Act as an assault on the civil liberties of all Americans and a precursor to an Orwellian "Big Brother" state. For instance, Nancy Chang, senior litigation attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights, claims that the Patriot Act "sacrifices our political freedoms in the name of national security and upsets the democratic values that define our nation by consolidating vast new powers in the executive branch of government"; "portends a wholesale suspension of civil liberties that will reach far beyond those who are involved in terrorist activities"; and "allows for the sharing of information between criminal and intelligence operations and thereby opens the door to a resurgence of domestic spying by the Central Intelligence." This latter criticism is perhaps the most significant, for it condemns the very provision that, had it been in effect prior to 9/11, would likely have prevented the mass murders of that day from taking place.

This section of DiscoverTheNetworks explores this debate. The category titled Text of USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 features the actual wording of the legislation, in its entirety.

The category titled Opposition to the Patriot Act takes a look at who are the leading opponents of the Patriot Act and its provisions.

The category titled Defending the Patriot Act presents resources that refute many of the charges made by its critics.

The category titled Cities Against the Patriot Act lists the city councils and local governments that have passed resolutions opposing the USA Patriot Act.