The USA Patriot Act was passed in response to the brutal events of September 11th, 2001. The Act provided for wider and sweeping new powers for domestic law enforcement and international intelligence agencies as well. Since its inception, the Act has been steeped in controversy and debate. Many claim that the broad new powers of the Act are a threat to the civil liberties prescribed by the Constitution and others assert that the Patriot Act is merely legislation created to maintain national security and prevent the occurrence of the terrorism that has become a large part of the modern day world. Benjamin Franklin once said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." In that spirit, despite the albeit noble aim of the USA Patriot Act to preserve national security, the legislation does not in fact take individual rights seriously, and in most cases completely disregards them.
             Attorney General John Ashcroft, a supporter of the USA Patriot Act, argues that, "the Department of Justice's first priority is to prevent future terrorist attacks." This is certainly a lofty argument, and ones that is guaranteed to capture the approval of the American public. Although, while this sentiment is certainly true and should be the first priority of the Department of Justice, it should not, under any circumstances, comprise the essential liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. For example, the USA Patriot Act "allows FBI agents to investigate American citizens for criminal matters without probably cause of crime if they say it is for 'intelligence purposes'." The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides for the individual right of due process and the Sixth Amendment provides the right to be informed of the facts of the accusation. These amendments are very clearly violated by this new power granted to th...