Faculty passes Patriot Act resolution without dissent
Ben Veghte
Issue date: 2/12/04 Section: News
In conjunction with the four different college faculties, three state governments and 236 communities in 37 states have passed resolutions of their own, condemning the Patriot Act's breach of Americans' civil liberties.
One of the pillar reasons for the faculty voting without dissent on the resolution was the preservation of their belief that students and the college at large were having their civil liberties invaded.
"It is important to stand up for what you believe in, which in this case is democracy and the Constitution," Adams explained.
When asked whether he approved of the faculty's decision to write a resolution to the Patriot Act, Randy Helm, President, of the College stated that he was proud that the faculty stood up for what they believed in. "I think that it has brought into the spotlight a very important issue that needs to be discussed on campus and in our society. I am very proud that our faculty has created an opportunity to examine an important civic issue."
Examining a civil liberty is in fact all the faculty is doing through writing the resolution. Even though the faculty has openly denounced specific aspects encompassed in the Patriot Act, it does not mean that they will openly not obey the written law of the Act. "We as a faculty would have very little opportunity to confront the law. Requests for information sought by the Justice Department would most likely go to the President, Head of the Library, or Campus Safety."
Adams went on to describe their resolution as "mostly symbolic." She stated that its point is to "register a protest against the potential abuses of civil rights and academic freedom permitted by these laws," not to openly declare that they plan on ignoring the laws outright.
Although symbolically it is only a protest against the Patriot Act, the resolution has been met with sour comments from Washington officials.
In an article published in The Morning Call on Feb. 3, Mark Corallo, Director of Public Affairs for the Justice Department, bashed the faculty's resolution, stating, "This would be laughable if it wasn't so scary. This is dangerous because if people believe this, it may cause them not to cooperate with authorities in a lawful and vital investigation, and that could lead people to lose lives."
Corallo was further quoted in saying, "They're just living in a fantasy world if they're promoting something so grossly wrong."
Adams stated that these claims by Corallo are nothing new to the debate, as this is how the Justice Department frequently reacts to resolutions of this kind.
"Corolla is known to leap on these things. This is how they deal with things of this nature," she said.
Adams further noted that in her and the faculty's defense for their actions, the resolution has been met by positive comments from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Adams stated that the ACLU called her personally to say, "You should know that you are considered a hero in the ACLU offices in Washington."
One of the pillar reasons for the faculty voting without dissent on the resolution was the preservation of their belief that students and the college at large were having their civil liberties invaded.
"It is important to stand up for what you believe in, which in this case is democracy and the Constitution," Adams explained.
When asked whether he approved of the faculty's decision to write a resolution to the Patriot Act, Randy Helm, President, of the College stated that he was proud that the faculty stood up for what they believed in. "I think that it has brought into the spotlight a very important issue that needs to be discussed on campus and in our society. I am very proud that our faculty has created an opportunity to examine an important civic issue."
Examining a civil liberty is in fact all the faculty is doing through writing the resolution. Even though the faculty has openly denounced specific aspects encompassed in the Patriot Act, it does not mean that they will openly not obey the written law of the Act. "We as a faculty would have very little opportunity to confront the law. Requests for information sought by the Justice Department would most likely go to the President, Head of the Library, or Campus Safety."
Adams went on to describe their resolution as "mostly symbolic." She stated that its point is to "register a protest against the potential abuses of civil rights and academic freedom permitted by these laws," not to openly declare that they plan on ignoring the laws outright.
Although symbolically it is only a protest against the Patriot Act, the resolution has been met with sour comments from Washington officials.
In an article published in The Morning Call on Feb. 3, Mark Corallo, Director of Public Affairs for the Justice Department, bashed the faculty's resolution, stating, "This would be laughable if it wasn't so scary. This is dangerous because if people believe this, it may cause them not to cooperate with authorities in a lawful and vital investigation, and that could lead people to lose lives."
Corallo was further quoted in saying, "They're just living in a fantasy world if they're promoting something so grossly wrong."
Adams stated that these claims by Corallo are nothing new to the debate, as this is how the Justice Department frequently reacts to resolutions of this kind.
"Corolla is known to leap on these things. This is how they deal with things of this nature," she said.
Adams further noted that in her and the faculty's defense for their actions, the resolution has been met by positive comments from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Adams stated that the ACLU called her personally to say, "You should know that you are considered a hero in the ACLU offices in Washington."