Data sharing notification usa patriot act

Table of Contents

• WAGING THE WAR ON TERROR
• Section 201. Authority to intercept wire, oral, and electronic communications relating to terrorism.
• Section 203. Authority to share criminal investigative information.
• Section 206. Roving surveillance authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.
• Section 209. Seizure of voice-mail messages pursuant to warrants.
• Section 210. Scope of subpoenas for records of electronic communications.
• Section 211. Clarification of scope.
• Section 212. Emergency disclosure of electronic communications to protect life and limb.
• Section 213. Authority for delaying notice of the execution of a warrant.
• Section 214. Pen register and trap and trace authority under FISA.
• Section 215. Access to business records and other items under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
• Section 216. Modification of authorities relating to use of pen registers and trap and trace devices.
• Section 217. Interception of computer trespasser communications.
• Section 218. Foreign intelligence information.
• Section 219. Single-jurisdiction search warrants for terrorism.
• Section 220. Nationwide service of search warrants for electronic evidence.
• Section 223. Civil liability for certain unauthorized disclosures.
• Section 319. Forfeiture of funds in United States interbank accounts.
• Section 373. Illegal money transmitting businesses.
• Section 412. Mandatory detention of suspected terrorists; habeas corpus; judicial review.
• Section 507. Disclosure of educational records.
• Section 508. Disclosure of information from NCES surveys.
• Section 801. Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence against mass transportation systems.
• Section 802. Definition of domestic terrorism.
• Section 805. Material support for terrorism.
• Section 806. Assets of terrorist organizations.
• Section 812. Post-release supervision of terrorists.

WAGING THE WAR ON TERROR

For decades, terrorists have waged war against U.S. interests. Now America is waging war against terrorists. As President Bush has said, "Free people will set the course of history." We have promoted freedom over the past two years while protecting civil liberties and protecting people here and around the world from further terrorist attacks.

The United States of America is winning the war on terrorism with unrelenting focus and unprecedented cooperation. Prevention of terrorist attacks is one of our highest priorities. With the President's lead, information sharing and cooperation has vastly increased. Today, we are better able to "connect the dots."

HOW WE ARE WAGING THE WAR ON TERRORISM:

First, we are disrupting terrorist threats, and capturing the terrorists that would carry them out. Since 9/11:

• Our intelligence and law enforcement communities, and our partners, both here and abroad, have identified and disrupted over 150 terrorist threats and cells;
• Worldwide, nearly two-thirds of al Qaida's known senior leadership has been captured or killed -- including a mastermind of the September 11 th attacks;
• Worldwide, more than 3,000 operatives have been incapacitated;
• Five terrorist cells in Buffalo, Detroit, Seattle, Portland (Oregon), and Northern Virginia have been broken up;
• 375 individuals have been criminally charged in the United States in terrorism investigations;
• Already, 195 individuals have been convicted or have pled guilty in the United States, including shoe-bomber Richard Reid and "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh; and
• Over 515 individuals linked to the September 11 th investigation have been removed from the United States.

Second, we are gathering and cultivating detailed knowledge on terrorism in the United States:

• Hundreds of suspected terrorists have been identified and tracked throughout the United States;
• Our human sources of intelligence related to international terrorism have increased 63% since 9/11, and our human sources of intelligence related to domestic terrorism have increased by 30% since 9/11, with the quality of this human intelligence having improved significantly; and
• Our counterterrorism investigations have more than doubled since 9/11.

Third, we are gathering information by leveraging criminal charges and long prison sentences. When individuals realize that they face a long prison term, they often try to lessen their prison time by pleading guilty and cooperating with the government.

• These individuals have provided critical intelligence about al-Qaida and other terrorist groups, safehouses, training camps, recruitment, and tactics in the United States, and the operations of those terrorists who mean to do Americans harm.
• One individual has given us intelligence on weapons stored here in the United States.
• Another individual has identified locations in the United States being scouted or cased for potential attacks by al-Qaida.

Fourth, we are dismantling the terrorist financial network. Already the United States Government has:

• Designated 40 terrorist organizations;
• Frozen $136 million in assets around the world;
• Charged 113 individuals in 25 judicial districts with terrorist financing-related crimes, with 57 convictions or guilty pleas to date; and
• Established an FBI Terrorist Financing Operations Section (TFOS) and utilized the Joint Terrorism Task Forces to identify, investigate, prosecute, disrupt, and dismantle terrorist-related financial and fundraising activities.

Fifth, we are using new legal tools to detect, disrupt, and prevent potential terrorist plots. Congress has provided better tools to make sure we are doing all we can, legally and within the bounds of the Constitution, to detect, disrupt, and prevent acts of terror. The PATRIOT Act passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities, in the Senate by 98-1, and in the House of Representatives by 357-66.

The PATRIOT Act allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking. These tools have been used for decades and have been reviewed and approved by the courts.

Sixth, the Department of Justice is building its long-term counter-terrorism capacity since 9/11:

• A nearly three-fold increase in counterterrorism funds;
• Approximately 1,000 new and redirected FBI agents dedicated to counterterrorism and counterintelligence;
• 200 new Assistant U.S. Attorneys;
• 100 Joint Terrorism Task Forces;
• More than 300% increase in Joint Terrorism Task Force staffing; and
• FBI Flying Squads developed for rapid deployment to hot spots worldwide.

Section 201. Authority to intercept wire, oral, and electronic communications relating to terrorism.

Summary: Allows law enforcement to use the existing electronic-surveillance authorities to investigate certain crimes that terrorists are likely to commit.

Before the PATRIOT Act, law enforcement had the authority to conduct electronic surveillance - by petitioning a court for a wiretap order - when investigating many ordinary, non-terrorism crimes. Agents also could use wiretaps to investigate some, but not all, of the crimes that terrorists often commit.

The non-terrorism offenses for which wiretaps were available included: drug crimes, mail fraud, and passport fraud.

Section 203. Authority to share criminal investigative information.

Summary: Permits sharing of grand jury and wiretap information regarding foreign intelligence with federal law-enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national-defense and national-security personnel.

Before USA PATRIOT, federal law sharply limited the ability of federal law-enforcement to share terrorism-related information with national-defense officials and members of the intelligence community in order to protect the American People from terrorism. As the recent 9/11 Congressional Joint Inquiry Report confirms, prior to September 11 th our ability to connect the dots was inhibited by the inability to coordinate throughout our own government.

For example, suppose that a federal prosecutor learned during grand jury testimony that terrorists were planning to detonate a nuclear bomb in Manhattan in the next 30 minutes. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) would have prevented him from immediately notifying national-security officials.

Section 206. Roving surveillance authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

Summary: Allows FISA court to authorize "roving surveillance" when it finds that the target's actions may thwart the identification of a communications company or other person whose assistance may be needed to carry out the surveillance.

For years, law enforcement has been able to use "roving wiretaps" - in which a wiretap authorization attaches to a particular suspect, rather than a particular communications device - to investigate ordinary crimes, including drug offenses and racketeering. The authority to use roving wiretaps in drug cases has existed since 1986.

Section 209. Seizure of voice-mail messages pursuant to warrants.

Summary: Allows law enforcement to obtain voice mail stored with a third party provider by using a search warrant, rather than a wiretap order.

Under previous law, law enforcement could use a search warrant to obtain voice messages stored on an answering machine inside a terrorist's home. But agents had to go through the burdensome process of obtaining a wiretap order if the same messages were stored with a third party provider.

Section 210. Scope of subpoenas for records of electronic communications.

Summary: Broadens the types of records that grand juries can subpoena from electronic communications providers to include the means and source of payment, such as bank accounts and credit card numbers.

Before USA PATRIOT, federal law allowed grand juries to subpoena a limited class of information from electronic-communications providers. Grand juries could not subpoena certain information - such as credit card and bank account numbers - that is indispensable in tracking down a suspect's true identity.

This information will prove particularly valuable in identifying the users of Internet services where a company does not verify its users' biographical information.

Section 211. Clarification of scope.

Summary: Clarifies that the statutes governing telephone and Internet communications - not the burdensome provisions of the Cable Act - apply to cable companies that provide Internet or telephone service.

Before the USA PATRIOT Act, some cable companies, citing restrictions in the federal Cable Act, ignored lawful court orders requiring them to turn over records about their customers' Internet or telephone use - even though any other Internet or telephone provider would have had to comply.

Terrorists no longer can exempt themselves from lawful investigations simply by choosing cable companies as their communications providers.

If agents want to use a pen register or trap-and-trace device (which record the numbers a telephone dials and from which it receives calls, but do not allow agents to listen to or record the contents of communications) or use a wiretap to listen to a cable customer's phone conversations, they still must apply for and receive a court order.

Section 212. Emergency disclosure of electronic communications to protect life and limb.

Summary: Allows computer-service providers to disclose communications in life-threatening emergencies.

Before USA PATRIOT, communications providers could not disclose records about their customers in emergency situations. If an Internet service provider learned that a customer was about to commit a terrorist attack, and notified law enforcement, it could be subject to civil lawsuits - even if the disclosure saved lives.

This is the equivalent of allowing citizens to tell police that, while walking down a public street, they overheard two people discussing a crime they were about to commit and decided to notify the police.

An anonymous person posted on an Internet message board a bomb death threat that specifically named a faculty member and several students.

Section 213. Authority for delaying notice of the execution of a warrant.

Summary: Allows courts, in certain narrow circumstances, to give delayed notice that a search warrant has been executed.

Delayed notification warrants are a long-existing, crime-fighting tool upheld by courts nationwide for decades in organized crime, drug cases and child pornography.

Section 213 of USA PATRIOT Act simply codified the authority law enforcement already had for decades. Because of differences between jurisdictions, the law was a mix of inconsistent standards that varied widely across the country. This lack of uniformity hindered complex terrorism cases. Section 213 resolved the problem by establishing a uniform statutory standard. Section 213 is a vital aspect of our strategy of prevention - detecting and incapacitating terrorists before they are able to strike.

Premature notification of a search warrant could result in the intimidation of witnesses, destruction of evidence, flight from prosecution, physical injury, and even death.

In United States v. Odeh, a recent narco-terrorism case, a court issued a section 213 warrant in connection with the search of an envelope that had been mailed to a target of an investigation. The search confirmed that the target was operating a hawala money exchange that was used to funnel money to the Middle East, including to an individual associated with someone accused of being an operative for Islamic Jihad in Israel. The delayed-notice provision allowed investigators to conduct the search without fear of compromising an ongoing wiretap on the target and several of the confederates. The target was later charged and notified of the search warrant.

Section 214. Pen register and trap and trace authority under FISA.

Summary: Allows the United States to obtain a FISA pen register order by certifying that the resulting information would be relevant to an investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.

Section 214 streamlined the process for obtaining pen registers under FISA. It preserved the existing court-order requirement. Now, as before, law enforcement cannot install a pen register unless it applies for and receives permission from the FISA court.

Under long-settled Supreme Court precedent, the use of pen registers does not constitute a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. As such, the Constitution does not require that law enforcement obtain court approval before installing a pen register. This is so because "a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties," and "when he used his phone, petitioner voluntarily conveyed numerical information to the telephone company." Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 744 (1979).

Section 215. Access to business records and other items under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Summary: Allows the FISA court, in an investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, to issue an ex parte order requiring the production of any tangible things.

The library habits of ordinary Americans are of no interest to those conducting terrorism investigations. However, historically terrorists and spies have used libraries to plan and carry out activities that threaten our national security. We should not allow libraries to become safe havens for terrorist or clandestine activities.

In a recent domestic terrorismcriminal case, a grand jury served a subpoena on a bookseller to obtain records showing that a suspect had purchased a book giving instructions on how to build a particularly unusual detonator that had been used in several bombings. This was important evidence identifying the suspect as the bomber.

Section 215 requires FBI agents to get a court order. Agents cannot use this authority unilaterally to compel any entity to turn over its records. FISA orders are unlike grand jury subpoenas, which are requested without court supervision.

On November 3, 2002, the Hartford Courant alleged that the FBI installed software on computers at the Hartford Public Library that lets agents track a person's use of the Internet and email messages. The article even said that individuals' library use could be surveilled even if they weren't suspected of being a terrorist. In reality, the FBI obtained a single search warrant to copy the hard drive of a specific computer that had been used to hack into a business computer system in California for criminal purposes. No software was installed on that or any other computer in the library. The Hartford Courant has retracted the story in full.

It expanded the types of entities that can be compelled to disclose information. Under the old provision, the FBI could obtain records only from "a common carrier, public accommodation facility, physical storage facility or vehicle rental facility." The new provision contains no such restrictions.

Section 216. Modification of authorities relating to use of pen registers and trap and trace devices.

Summary: Amends the pen register/trap and trace statute (1) to clarify that it applies to Internet communications, and (2) to allow for a single order that is valid across the country.

For years, law enforcement has used pen registers to track which numbers a particular telephone dials. See 18 U.S.C. � 3123. Before the USA PATRIOT Act, it was not clear that they could be used to gather the same routing and addressing information about Internet communications.

The Department is committed to complying with the Act's mandate that pen registers not be used to capture content. On May 24, 2002, the Deputy Attorney General issued a memorandum instructing field offices to: (1) minimize any possible collection of content; (2) refrain from using any content that may be acquired inadvertently; and (3) coordinate with Department headquarters about what constitutes content.

Section 216 was used in the investigation of the murder of Wall Street Journalreporter Danny Pearl, to obtain information that proved critical to identifying some of the perpetrators.

Section 217. Interception of computer trespasser communications.

Summary: Allows victims of computer-hacking crimes to request law-enforcement assistance in monitoring trespassers on their computers.

The law has always recognized the right of landowners to ask law enforcement to help expel people who illegally trespass on their property.

Prior to the enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act, the law prohibited computer service providers from sharing with law enforcement that hackers had broken into their systems.

Section 218. Foreign intelligence information.

Summary: Encourages an integrated antiterrorism campaign by allowing the use of FISA whenever "a significant purpose" of the investigation is foreign intelligence.

Before the USA PATRIOT Act, a perceived metaphorical "wall" often inhibited vital information sharing and coordination. Intelligence investigators were concerned about sharing information with, and seeking advice from, law enforcement investigators and prosecutors. There was a fear that such sharing and consultation could mean that they would not be able to obtain or continue FISA coverage.

Previously, courts had ruled that FISA could be used only when foreign intelligence was the "primary purpose" of an investigation.

PIJ is alleged to be one of the world's most violent terrorist outfits. It is responsible for murdering over 100 innocent people, including Alisa Flatow, a young American killed in a bus bombing near the Israeli settlement of Kfar Darom.

The Attorney General instructed all U.S. Attorneys to review intelligence files to discover whether there was a basis for bringing criminal charges against the subjects of intelligence investigations. More than 5,000 files have been reviewed as part of this process. Information from this review has been used to open many criminal investigations.

The court expressly held "that FISA as amended is constitutional because the surveillances it authorizes are reasonable." In re Sealed Case, 310 F.3d 717, 746 (FISCR 2002).

Section 219. Single-jurisdiction search warrants for terrorism.

Summary: Allows courts to issue search warrants that are valid nationwide in terrorism investigations.

Under prior law, a court could only issue a search warrant authorizing searches within its own district. That created unnecessary delays and burdens when investigating terrorist networks, which often span a number of judicial districts.

Section 220. Nationwide service of search warrants for electronic evidence.

Summary: Allows courts with jurisdiction over the offense to issue search warrants for communications stored by providers anywhere in the country.

Under previous law, some courts declined to issue search warrants for email stored on servers in other districts. Requiring investigators to obtain warrants in distant jurisdictions has delayed many time-sensitive investigations. It also placed an enormous administrative burden on districts in which major Internet service providers are located (such as E.D. Va. and N.D. Cal.).

The enhanced ability to obtain this information quickly also has proved invaluable in several sensitive non-terrorism investigations, including: (1) the tracking of a fugitive; and (2) a hacker who stole a company's trade secrets and then extorted money from the company.

Section 223. Civil liability for certain unauthorized disclosures.

Summary: Creates a cause of action and authorizes money damages against the United States if officers disclose sensitive information without authorization.

There have been no administrative disciplinary proceedings or civil actions initiated under section 223 of the Act for unauthorized disclosures of intercepts.

Section 319. Forfeiture of funds in United States interbank accounts.

Summary: Permits the forfeiture of funds held in United States interbank accounts.

Section 319 allows the government to seize funds subject to forfeiture, which are located in a foreign bank account, by authorizing the seizure of the foreign bank's funds that are held in a correspondent U.S. account.

This is true regardless of whether or not the money in the correspondent account is directly traceable to the money held in the foreign bank account.

On January 18, 2001, a federal grand jury indicted James Gibson for various offenses, including conspiracy to commit money laundering, and mail and wire fraud. Gibson, a lawyer, allegedly defrauded his clients, numerous personal injury victims, of millions of dollars by fraudulently structuring settlements. Gibson fled to Belize, depositing some of the proceeds from the scheme in two Belizean banks. The Department's efforts to recover the proceeds initially proved unsuccessful. But following the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, section 319 was used to serve a seizure warrant on the Belizean bank's interbank account in the United States. The remaining funds were recovered.

Section 373. Illegal money transmitting businesses.

Summary: Makes it unlawful to run an unlicensed foreign money transmittal business, and eliminates prior requirement that the defendant have known about the state licensing requirement.

Section 373 has enhanced the government's ability to crack down on unlicensed foreign money-transmittal businesses - which terrorists and their supporters often use to raise funds for terrorist operations.

On April 30, 2002, a federal jury in Boston convicted Mohamed Hussein for running a foreign money transmittal business (Barakaat North America, Inc.) without a license in violation of section 373. The al-Barakaat network was affiliated with and received funding from al Qaeda. In 2000 and 2001, after the Hussein brothers ignored Massachusetts's warning that their business needed to be licensed, nearly $3 million was wired from his Boston bank account to the United Arab Emirates. On July 22, 2002, Mohammed Hussein was sentenced to one and a half years in prison, to be followed by two years of supervised release.

Section 412. Mandatory detention of suspected terrorists; habeas corpus; judicial review.

Summary: Requires the detention of aliens who are certified as threats to the national security, pending their removal from the United States.

Section 412 allows the government, with extensive judicial supervision, temporarily to detain terrorist aliens until they are removed from the country. It is the equivalent of denying bail to a criminal defendant. Section 412 ensures that terrorists are not released to live among the people they seek to harm.

Section 507. Disclosure of educational records.

Summary: Allows the Department to seek a court order to obtain educational records that are relevant to an investigation of a grave felony or an act of terrorism.

Section 507 has an extremely narrow scope. Records are available only in investigations of the severest terrorist crimes, such as biological-weapons offenses, chemical-weapons offenses, bombing government property, and destroying airliners.

Section 508. Disclosure of information from NCES surveys.

Summary: Allows the Department to seek a court order to obtain records from the National Center for Educational Statistics that are relevant to an investigation of a grave felony or an act of terrorism.

Section 508 has an extremely narrow scope. Records are available only in investigations of the severest terrorist crimes, such as biological-weapons offenses, chemical-weapons offenses, bombing government property, and destroying airliners.

Section 801. Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence against mass transportation systems.

Summary: Makes it a federal offense to engage in terrorist attacks and other acts of violence against mass transportation systems.

The attacks of September 11 confirmed that terrorists are committed to attacking mass transit systems such as airliners. Section 801 created a new offense prohibiting violent offenses against mass transportation systems, vehicles, facilities, or passengers.

A federal judge dismissed the section 801 charge, concluding that an airliner is not a "vehicle" within the meaning of the statute.

Section 802. Definition of domestic terrorism.

Summary: Adds to 18 U.S.C. � 2331 a new definition of "domestic terrorism," similar to the existing definition of "international terrorism."

Section 802's definition of "domestic terrorism" is extremely narrow - indeed, it is much narrower than the pre-existing definition of "international terrorism."

In addition, law enforcement would have to show that the conduct appears to have been committed with a specified terrorism related intent, and that the conduct occurred primarily in the U.S.

Section 805. Material support for terrorism.

Summary: Strengthens the existing ban on providing material support to terrorists and terrorist organizations.

Before the PATRIOT Act, it was not certain that the ban on "material support or resources" encompassed expert advice and assistance - for example, advice provided by a civil engineer on destroying a building, or advice by a biochemist on making a biological agent more lethal.

Section 806. Assets of terrorist organizations.

Summary: Amends federal forfeiture law to authorize civil forfeiture of assets owned by persons engaged in terrorism.

Forfeiture under section 806 is authorized only in narrow circumstances. The subject must be engaged in conduct that (1) violates federal or state criminal law; (2) involves violence or the risk of death; and (3) is committed with a terrorist intent.

Section 812. Post-release supervision of terrorists.

Summary: Courts may authorize post-release supervision periods of up to life for persons convicted of terrorism crimes that involved the occurrence or foreseeable risk of death or serious injury

Prior federal law generally capped the maximum period of post-imprisonment supervision for released felons at 3 or 5 years. The drug laws mandate longer supervision periods for persons convicted of certain drug crimes, and specify no upper limit on the duration of supervision, but before the PATRIOT Act there was nothing comparable for terrorism offenses.