1115.org

When Congress rushed to pass the Patriot Act in the weeks immediately following 9/11, a few people managed to climb out of terrorism-induced hysteria long enough to question if maybe, just maybe, the sweeping new powers granted to law enforcement would be abused. For the most part, those voices were ignored by a nation looking for a safety blanket, not some wishy-washy nonsense about civil liberties.

Since then, we’ve seen those powers—which were theoretically granted to fight terrorism—used to prosecute art professors, investigate drug dealers, fight copyright infringement, punish the webmaster of a Stargate SG-1 fan site, subpoena stockbrokers in a money-laundering case, and maybe even open a file on pesky administration critics. No one can say for sure, since those new powers allow “sneak and peek” searches and warrants from secret courts so that a target can be investigated without having any idea that the government is peeking through his home or records.

Now comes news that the FBI has been conducting clandestine surveillance on hundreds of American citizens, without proper oversight or even the correct paperwork. These cases, which came to light under a Freedom of Information Act request, show that there were at least 287 violations recorded in the three-year period of 2002 to 2004 alone. A look into the details is even more troubling:

The FBI has conducted clandestine surveillance on some U.S. residents for as long as 18 months at a time without proper paperwork or oversight, according to previously classified documents to be released today.

Records turned over as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit also indicate that the FBI has investigated hundreds of potential violations related to its use of secret surveillance operations, which have been stepped up dramatically since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks but are largely hidden from public view.

(…)

In several of the cases outlined in the documents released to EPIC, FBI agents failed to file annual updates on ongoing surveillance, which are required by Justice Department guidelines and presidential directives, and which allow Justice lawyers to monitor the progress of a case. Others included a violation of bank privacy statutes and an improper physical search, though the details of the transgressions are edited out. At least two others involve e-mails that were improperly collected after the authority to do so had expired.

Remember, these documents only cover a relatively small period of time, and don’t even provide a complete picture of infractions made. Furthermore, the only reason this information was made public was someone decided to sue the Justice Department for them; without a lawsuit, these kind of things happen in the shadows without anyone being the wiser.

With Patriot Act 2.0 on the horizon, the timing of this information could not be more critical—if law enforcement is already pushing their given powers to the edge (and beyond), is it really such a good idea to give them even more latitude?