New York Times: Senate Democrat Proposes Alternative Antiterrorism Plan. And Mr. Leahy made clear that he would not be rushed, noting that Congress took almost two months to pass antiterrorism legislation in response to the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. “We do not want the terrorists to win by having basic protections taken away from us,” he said.
Patrick Leahy was a prosecutor in Vermont before he ran for the Senate. He was no friend of criminals — or suspects — in those days, but he was always sensitive to that little document we call the Constitution of the United States, and especially the part we call the Bill of Rights.
Now he and those who want to protect liberty in the face of the worst provocation in modern times are facing an overwhelming urge to do anything, anything, to stop the murderers from more atrocities. But the Bush administration wants its new anti-terrorism law right now. Maybe Congress should read it first.
The provisions, as reported widely, are a wish list for those who would curb liberty in the interests of giving law enforcement more power. The legislation wouldn’t necessarily make us safer, though the backers no doubt believe it would.
It’s heartening to see that at least a few politicians from both sides of the political spectrum are hesitating before enacting this law. So are many political organizations from the far left to the far right, as well as in the middle.
Today in Washington, a broad coalition of groups endorsed a ten-point declaration “In Defense of Freedom. Read it, please. Then call and write your elected officials and tell them what you think.
This is a critical time.