Topic: Patriot Act Upheld In Sailor's Terrorism Case

New York Times
January 25, 2008
Pg. B3
NEW HAVEN (AP) — A federal judge ruled Thursday that the Patriot Act is constitutional, rejecting a claim by a former sailor charged with supporting terrorism that the evidence against him was illegally obtained.
The defendant, Hassan Abu-Jihaad, 31, of Phoenix, pleaded not guilty in April to charges that he provided material support to terrorists with intent to kill American citizens and disclosed classified information relating to national defense. His trial is scheduled for Feb. 25.
The authorities say that Mr. Abu-Jihaad leaked a document describing the location and vulnerabilities of a Navy battle group to suspected terrorism supporters in London.
In challenging intercepted phone calls and searches of e-mail messages that prosecutors want to introduce at trial, Mr. Abu-Jihaad cited a ruling in September by Judge Ann L. Aiken of Federal District Court in Oregon that struck down crucial portions of the Patriot Act as unconstitutional.
Judge Aiken ruled that the act could not be used to authorize secret searches and wiretapping to gather criminal evidence instead of intelligence without violating the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. The Bush administration is appealing that ruling.
In Thursday’s ruling, Judge Mark R. Kravitz of Federal District Court here said he disagreed with the Oregon ruling, citing other court decisions and safeguards in the law to protect constitutional rights.
“The balance Congress struck between an individual’s important interest in privacy and the government’s legitimate need to obtain foreign intelligence information remains reasonable and one that complies with the Fourth Amendment,” Judge Kravitz wrote in his decision.
Judge Kravitz acknowledged that the issue might go to a higher appeals court.