subject
English, 03.06.2021 16:20 natalie2sheffield

Expansion of the Executive Power by the Patriot Act (From Understanding and Responding to the Terrorism Phenomenon: A Multi-Dimensional Perspective, P 354-364, 2007, Ozgur Nikbay and Suleyman Hancerli, eds. -- See NCJ-225118)NCJ Number 225147Author(s) Ali OzdoganDate Published 2007AnnotationThis paper presents a brief overview and analysis of the U. S. Patriot Act (the Act) and discusses the positions of the President and the Congress toward the Act, followed by the author’s assessment of the political implications of the Act. AbstractAlthough the power of the executive branch has expanded in matters of national security since the 1960s the enactment of the Patriot Act in response to September 11 has provided a further expansion of executive power. The Act makes changes to more than 15 existing Federal statutes, broadens the definition of terrorism, increases penalties for terrorists, expands the Federal Government’s power on wiretapping, and increases the scope of search warrants and subpoenas by lowering standards of probable cause. In addition, it facilitates information-sharing among law enforcement agencies, expands surveillance authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and restricts the rights of citizens and noncitizens. In post September 11, the Bush administration has been a moving force in initiating a "war" against terrorism. Congress supported the President as the head of the executive branch in this "war" initiative, believing that their constituents wanted to feel secure more than they wanted to hold the line on protecting their civil rights. The Congress, however, included "sunset" provisions for the Act, recognizing that public support for some of its features might wane over time. Therefore, if public support for the Act deteriorates, certain objectionable provisions of the Act will automatically expire. The author of this paper argues that counterterrorism polices should be acceptable to the public and to democratic principles over the long term. This suggests that legislators should adhere to the fundamental principles framed in the U. S. Constitution, regardless of the nature of the terrorist threat or the public’s current anxiety about security. 17 notes and 19 referencesAdditional DetailsSale SourceIOS Press AddressNieuwe Hemweg 6B, 1013 BG Amsterdam, NetherlandsPublication FormatBook ChapterPublication TypeLegislation/Policy

ansver
Answers: 2

Another question on English

question
English, 21.06.2019 12:50
How does the use of parallelism affect the short story "in another country"
Answers: 3
question
English, 21.06.2019 23:00
Write 3 parallel sentencess about an animal of your choice
Answers: 3
question
English, 22.06.2019 01:00
How are the two arguments made in the passages different? a. the first passage claims that pets in class will children with health problems; the second passage says pets will make some health problems worse. b. the first passage claims that students’ nervousness will decrease around pets; the second says that students’ nervousness will increase around pets. c. the first passage claims that pets will make the teacher’s work easier by keeping students busy; the second passage says pets will make the teacher’s work harder. d. the first passage claims that pets in school will be good for kids’ mental health; the second passage says pets will be bad for kids’ mental health.
Answers: 3
question
English, 22.06.2019 03:00
9. types of literature that are told from a point of view include autobiographies, memoirs, diaries, and journals.
Answers: 2
You know the right answer?
Expansion of the Executive Power by the Patriot Act (From Understanding and Responding to the Terror...
Questions
question
Chemistry, 20.10.2020 05:01
question
Mathematics, 20.10.2020 05:01
question
Mathematics, 20.10.2020 05:01
question
English, 20.10.2020 05:01
question
English, 20.10.2020 05:01
Questions on the website: 13722367