IP: Another big bite out of the 4th amendment?

[Dave Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu>]

>From: "bdolan" <bdolan@usit.net>
>To: <farber@cis.upenn.edu>
>Subject: Another big bite out of the 4th amendment?
>Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 19:23:18 -0400
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
>
>A random thing which arrived in my e-mailbox today.
>
>Know anything about this?
>
>Brad
>
>
>Fourth Amendment Sneak Attack
>Reno's outrageous Secret Searches measure.
>
>By Dave Kopel, of the Independence Institute
>
>The Reno Department of Justice is very good at being sneaky. The DOJ's
>lobbyists are on the verge of successfully sneaking into law a
>provision
>which will authorize federal agents to stealthily enter people's homes,
>search the homes, and not tell anyone.
>
>The Secret Searches measure is so outrageous that it would have no
>chance of
>being enacted as a bill on its own, when subjected to public scrutiny
>and
>debate. So instead, the DOJ has nestled the Secret Search item deep
>inside a
>long bill dealing with methamphetimines. The measure is further
>disguised
>with the innocuous title of "Notice Clarification."
>
>Subject to virtually no public discussion, the Secret Searches item has
>already passed the Senate, hidden inside the methamphetimine giant S.
>486.
>Next week, the House Judiciary Committee will take up H.R. 2987, the
>House
>version of the Senate bill, which also contains the buried clause on
>Secret
>Searches (section 301). The federal bankruptcy reform bill (which has
>passed
>both houses, and is currently in a conference committee) likewise has
>the
>hidden Secret Searches language.
>
>If the Secret Searches provision became law, it would apply to all
>searches
>conducted by the federal government, not just searches involving
>methamphetimines or bankruptcy.
>
>When conducting searches, federal agents are currently required to
>announce
>their presence before entering, and to provide an inventory of any
>items
>they take. Because the person whose home or business is being searched
>knows
>about the search, he can exercise his Fourth Amendment rights, and make
>sure
>that the police have a properly-issued search warrant. He can also see
>if
>the search is being conducted according to the warrant's terms   i.e.,
>the
>police are searching only for items authorized by the warrant, they are
>searching the right address, etc.
>
>But under a Secret Searches law, federal police could enter a person's
>home
>surreptitiously, conduct a search, and not tell the homeowner until
>months
>later.
>
>Even months later, the police would not have to provide an inventory of
>"intangible" items which were taken in a search. So if the police
>entered
>your home secretly, and photocopied your diary or made a copy of your
>computer hard disk, they would never have to inform you of their
>actions.
>
>Should the Secret Searches item be deleted from the methamphetimine and
>bankruptcy bills, it is likely that Clinton will try to sneak the item
>into
>a gigantic budget bill, during the Congressional Republicans' annual
>fall
>appropriations surrender. Take note: In a previous Congress, Clinton
>was
>able to obtain authority for warrantless wiretaps   which had been
>defeated
>after public debate earlier in the year   by hiding the authority in
>the
>year's omnibus budget bill.
> >