Appalachian State University Student Resolution

SB 037-033 Resolution of Support of Boone's Adoption of the Proposed Town Resolution Affirming Civil Rights

SB Number SB 037-003
Type of Legislation Resolution of Support
Date of Introduction November 03, 2003
Sponsor State and National Affairs
Introducers H. Dustin Bayard
Miriam Makhyoun
Evan Moody
John Walsh
Amanda Zeddy
Subject USA PATRIOT Act
Purpose To show support of the City of Boone's adoption of the proposed Town Resolution affirming civil rights.

Civil liberties have always been an integral part of this country and this university. The Student Government Association of Appalachian State University (SGA) values civil rights and constitutional freedoms. Over the years, SGA has supported various bills designed to increase civil liberties on this campus and to encourage the implementation of current rights as United States citizens, which include, but are not limited to, the expansion of the free speech policy, enabling students access to free legal advice, increasing due process rights in Judicial Affairs, and securing students' religious freedoms. Because students have previously supported initiatives based on the expansion of civil liberties, and the ability to protect civil liberties currently institutionalized, it is fully relevant to the student body and the SGA to petition the institutions that govern us for a redress of grievances, through whatever means and avenues we have available. The passage of this legislation will act as an endorsement of the resolution being introduced to the Boone Town Council in January 2004.
The students' interconnectedness with the community of Boone is undeniable. We possess the ability to support movements in our community that are based on defending human rights and civil liberties. As students of Appalachian State University, members of the Boone community, and citizens of the United States of America, we are entitled to speak out against violations of civil liberties, and seek to preserve our freedoms for all students, as well as our friends and neighbors.

On October 24, 2001, Congress passed the 342 page Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act), just 45 days after September 11th.. It is a tendency of nation-states to engage in defensive acts in an attempt to retain security when faced with trying times. Immediately after the events of September 11th, nearly everyone agreed that something had to be done to provide greater security for our society. The question then was, ""how can this be achieved?"" Attorney General of the United States, John Ashcroft, made requests for legislative action, and much of his request was incorporated into the Senate version of the USA PATRIOT Act.

After the Senate's passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, the House pursued a compromise bill, entitled H.R. 1362. This bill incorporated provisions from two earlier anti-terrorism bills, H.R. 2975 and S. 1510. These bills were passed by their sponsoring cameral on October 12, 2001 and October 11, 2001, respectively. The joint resolution was introduced on October 23, 2001. That day, nine committees considered the legislation, and after seventy five minutes of debate, a vote was made at 8:27am. When it was questioned whether 2/3 voted in the affirmative, the chair postponed a role call vote until the next morning. At 11:03am on October 24, 2001, the bill was passed with a vote of 357 to 66.

While many aspects of the USA PATRIOT Act are rational approaches to increasing our security, Section 215 is the segment that has been criticized the most for its counterproductive approach. Section 215 thwarts the goodwill of the legislation in a desire to make us more secure by allowing the government to restrict the liberties and freedoms that make this country worth defending. Grievances in response to Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act have been made questioning the constitutionality of the law.

The USA PATRIOT Act has been charged with violating the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, specifically the freedoms of religion, speech, assembly, and the press. Firstly, ""8,000 Middle Eastern and South Asian immigrants have been interrogated because of their religious or ethnic background, not because of actual wrongdoing"" . The act also allows the government to spy on religious and political organizations, as well as individuals without evidence of wrongdoing. Organizations and lawful advocacy groups can now be labeled as ""terrorist"" bodies, and the act could allow for them to be subjected to surveillance, wiretapping, and harassment for lawful political advocacy. The USA PATRIOT Act also has been accused of denying the freedom of the press for withholding information as to what actions the government has taken in accordance with its newly bestowed powers and for detaining and imprisoning persons without giving any details as to how many people are being held, where, and for what purpose. Denying this information to the press limits how much verifiable and empirical data can be released to the public via various mediums of media. Seeing as how an educated populace is an essential element for democracy, limiting the knowledge available about our government and its actions in turn weakens our society.

The USA PATRIOT Act has also been charged with violating the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights . Section 215 allows the FBI to order any person or entity to turn over "any tangible things," so long as the FBI "specif[ies]" that the order is "for an authorized investigation . . . to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities." The government no longer needs to show probable cause, or even reasonable grounds to believe, that the person whose records it seeks is engaged in criminal activity. The provision also conflicts with the principles expressed in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments by failing to require that those who are the subject of Section 215 orders be told that their privacy has been compromised . Expanding the government's ability to conduct surveillance without probable cause as long as it is being done for ""intelligence purposes"" poses the potential for abuse of individuals' rights to privacy.

Furthermore, the arrest, interrogation, detention, and imprisonment of peoples without justifiable grounds has been indicted as violations against the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
In the past two years, 202 cities and three states have passed resolutions and ordinances similar to the proposed piece of legislation that will be brought before the Boone Town Council. On that list of cities is Boone, who it is noted is in the process of securing a resolution to promote civil liberties and ""not participate, to the extent legally permissible, in law enforcement activities that threaten civil right and civil liberties of the people of Boone.""
It should be reflected that this piece of legislation, which supports and promotes the institutional protection of civil liberties deprived to United States citizens by certain provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, is a matter which is not to be perceived as a political issue, but rather a constitutional issue. It is not political affiliations that are motivating this issue, but this issue is motivated by alliances. These alliances encouraging the reconsideration of aspects of the USA PATRIOT Act are built through common recognition of the value of our civil liberties, freedoms, and the importance of defending them. In the process of securing a town resolution, the Boone Bill of Rights Defense Committee has called upon the support of students as a large portion of the Boone population for support. It is in accordance and solidarity with the aforementioned organization and cause that this piece of legislation is proposed.

Desired Outcome:

Immediately