The Department of Justice argued for the continuation of three provisions after the PATRIOT Act was preserved in 2011 . What were these provisions?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Much of the power of the PATRIOT Act was preserved in 2011 when the Department of Justice argued for the continuation of three key provisions. First, the attorney general asked for permission to continue roving wiretaps. These are used when a surveillance target is using disposable phones or intermittent Internet connections. Law enforcement officials may quickly monitor all new communications without returning to a court to obtain a new search warrant. The second provision dealt with evidence. The PATRIOT Act gave law enforcement officials expanded powers to gather evidence in national security cases. When making an arrest or serving a search warrant, officers could collect all items that might be related to the cases. For example, if a person were taken into custody in a terrorism case, investigators might want to seize all of the electronic equipment in the suspect's home. The 2011 changes allowed them to do so. The final aspect of the law preserved by the Obama administration in 2011 dealt with eavesdropping. The government gained the right to conduct wiretaps of noncitizens suspected of acts that threaten national security (New York Times, 2012). Leading Democrats in the Senate complained about the president's support for these three provisions, claiming that there were no efforts to ensure that civil liberties would be protected? the attorney general disagreed.