EDITORIAL
Patriot Act must consider civil liberties

As Congress debates the future of the U.S. Patriot Act, it is clear that the need to balance security with the liberties guaranteed by our Constitution must be front and center.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III argued last week at a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the controversial anti-terrorism law needs only minor tweaking.

The far-reaching law — meant to be an extraordinary weapon against terrorists — was hastily passed after the Sept. 11 attacks. Sixteen of the provisions in the law will expire at the end of the year unless extended by Congress.

When the law was passed, Americans were told it was needed to fight a new kind of war, a war waged by a shadowy enemy. Congress, using the Patriot Act, allowed law enforcement agencies to imprison people without due process and to punish dissent, all of which is an affront to our most fundamental American principles of justice.

It's understandable that, in these perilous times, protecting our safety may come at a price that may be distasteful.

But, the Patriot Act and the implementation of the law in the years since 9/11 have eroded our civil liberties.

In an encouraging sign, Gonzales tempered the hard line taken by his predecessor, John Ashcroft, and said he is "open to suggestions" on changes to the law.

That collaborative tone is refreshing.

But the modifications he proposes are relatively minor. One relates to one of the more controversial aspects of the law, subpoenas of business records, including library records. Gonzales said the Justice Department would support giving recipients of such subpoenas the right to consult lawyers and raise legal challenges. Critics note the government has already conceded on that point.

The Justice Department also released previously classified information detailing some of the uses of the Patriot Act. According to those statistics, the roving wiretaps provision of the law has been used only 49 times since 9/11 and delayed-notice warrants have been employed 155 times. Information has been obtained under the business records provision 35 times.

These statistics seem to indicate that some restraint has been exercised in implementing the law. But, of course, we have no way of knowing if that usage was truly necessary.

The debate over the Patriot Act is expected to extend over several months. Clearly the sentiment in Congress is to extend it. Let's hope that our nation's senators and congressmen will have the courage and political will to refine this law to target wrongdoers and restrain sweeping provisions that too often encroach on the fundamental rights of innocent Americans.