Patriot Rebellion Grows

In a continuing series, American Free Press is updating readers and supporters about the growing patriotic resistance to the misnamed, unconstitutional Patriot Act.

 

By James P. Tucker Jr.

 

Arcata, Calif., (population 16,000) is the first to pass an ordinance that outlaws voluntary compliance with the federal Patriot Act. To date, 89 cities have passed resolutions condemning the Patriot Act and urging local officials to refuse to comply, but Arcata is the first to actually outlaw compliance. It won’t be the last.

Similar action is pending in at least a dozen other cities and those that passed earlier denunciations are considering stronger measures to outlaw cooperation. A statewide resolution against the act is close to passage in Hawaii.

“I call this a nonviolent, pre-emptive attack,” said David Meserve, the freshman city councilman who drafted the ordinance with the help of the Arcata city manager, city attorney and police chief.

“We want the local police to do what they were meant to do—protect their citizens,” said Nancy Talanian, co-director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee in Florence, Mass., which advises citizens on how to draft resolutions.

Cities across the country passed anti-war resolutions with little observable effect on the administration but Talanian said resolutions condemning the Patriot Act are “not quite as symbolic” as the measures opposing the invasion of Iraq.

“Normally, the president and Congress don’t pay much attention when it comes to waging war,” she said. “But in the case of the Patriot Act, the federal government can’t really tell municipalities that you have to do the work the INS or FBI want you to do. The city can say, ‘No, I’m sorry. We hire our police to protect our citizens and we don’t want our citizens pulled aside and thrown in jail without probable cause.”

While federal law pre-empts state laws in most cases, there are limits. Years ago, Congress required sheriffs to conduct extensive background checks on local citizens who wanted to buy handguns. The sheriffs, through their association, refused. They argued that under the Constitution’s division of powers doctrine, Congress could not impose duties on local officials. The Supreme Court sustained them.

Evidence that Congress is beginning to take this grass-roots resistance seriously comes with the introduction of the Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157) by Rep. Bernie Sanders (Vt.). His bill, which has 73 co-sponsors, would restore privacy protections for book borrowers and book buyers. Now, federal officials can demand to know what a citizen borrowed at a library or bought in a bookstore.

Earlier, Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), the ranking minority member, sent Attorney General John Ashcroft a strong letter seeking information on implementation of the Patriot Act (American Free Press, April 21, 2003).

In Arcata, Meserve, a weather-worn builder and contractor in his 50s who wears flannel shirts, won his council seat on the platform: “The federal government has gone stark raving mad.”

“The ordinance went through so easy we were surprised,” he said. “We started going up to people asking what they thought. They thought, ‘great.’ It’s our citywide form of nonviolent disobedience.”

The fine for breaking the new law is $57. It applies only to the top nine managers of the city, telling them they have to refer any Patriot Act request to the City Council.