Supervisors pass resolution against Patriot Act Supervisors pass resolution against Patriot Act (April 02, 2004)

Alameda County joins others in concern for civil liberties
by Dolores Fox Ciardelli

Alameda County is the 265th city or county to oppose the USA Patriot Act.

The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously March 16 to pass a resolution put forth by Supervisor Scott Haggerty, which was a compromise in response to a more strongly worded declaration by Supervisor Nate Miley of Oakland several months ago.

"The very original recommendation opposed the Patriot Act altogether and asked for it to be repealed," said Chris Gray, Haggerty's chief of staff. "And no jurisdiction in the United States had done that."

The new resolution states that the County Board of Supervisors is opposed to terrorism but there are parts of the USA Patriot Act that violate the U.S. Constitution, said Gray.

The USA Patriot Act - an acronym for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism - was enacted after Sept. 11, 2001, expanding the powers of law enforcement agencies. But since then both liberal and conservative groups have expressed concerns that parts of it deny civil liberties.

The Pleasanton Library Commission passed a resolution last June supporting the Freedom to Read Protection Act and the Library and Bookseller Act, which both protect libraries and bookstores from controversial sections of the Patriot Act. The City Council in August supported the commission's actions and also passed a resolution and wrote letters urging Pleasanton's Congressional representatives to monitor implementation of the Patriot Act and to work for the repeal of the parts that violate fundamental liberties.

But the county compromise resolution goes further. It states that the Patriot Act violates the Constitution "and these provisions and other legislation and executive actions degrade civil rights by permitting, among other injustices, secret searches and electronic eavesdropping without showing of probable cause; seizures of business, library, and educational institution records without notifying the subject of the search; indefinite, secret detentions; and persecution of entire communities based on racial profiling of Muslims, Arabs, and South Asians."

"I personally still think it goes a bit too far but am willing to support the compromise because I think things have been put into it that are important to me," said Supervisor Haggerty at the board meeting March 16.

"He was concerned that this Board did not have the Constitutional Law knowledge to say which sections of the Patriot Act actually were unconstitutional," explained Gray afterward.

Haggerty also said the first "Whereas" is "extremely important" to him: "Whereas, each member of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors has sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and its guarantee of the fundamental civil rights and liberties of the people of Alameda County, and further affirms its absolute opposition to any weakening of those right and liberties, whether by terrorism or by unconstitutional laws and policies."

The resolution also calls upon Congress to: "Require the President and Attorney General to promptly identify every detainee in the U.S. and abroad, to afford each detainee access to counsel, and follow due process by speedily charging or releasing every detainee."

Gray said he worked with members of local groups committed to opposing the Patriot Act, such as SAVOR Save Our Rights Coalition of the Tri-Valley. He said the others wanted to name President Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft personally but a compromise was reached to just name the office. "We were trying to keep it general," said Gray.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.