madam speaker , i join my many colleagues , many victims of terrorism , and many victims of racial and religious profiling in opposing this legislation , h.r. 3199 , for several reasons . 
first , we never have been given the facts necessary to fully evaluate the operation of the underlying bill , the usa patriot act . 
second , there are numerous provisions in both the expiring and other sections of the patriot act that have little to do with combating terrorism , intrude on our privacy and civil liberties , and have been subject to repeated abuse and misuse by the justice department . 
third , the legislation does nothing to address the many unilateral civil rights and civil liberties abuses by the administration since the september 11 attacks . 
finally , the bill does not provide law enforcement with any additional real and meaningful tools necessary to help our nation prevail in the war against terrorism . 
since 2002 , 389 communities and 7 states have passed resolutions opposing parts of the patriot act , representing over 62 million people . 
additionally , numerous groups ranging the political spectrum have come i sit as ranking democrat on the subcommittee on immigration , border security , and claims . 
of particular concern to me are a number of immigration-related provisions that cast such a broad net to allow for the detention and deportation of people engaging in innocent associational activity and constitutionally protected speech and that permit the indefinite detention of immigrants and noncitizens who are not terrorists . 
among these troubling provisions are those that : authorize the attorney general , ag , to arrest and detain noncitizens based on mere suspicion , and require that they remain in detention `` irrespective of any relief they may be eligible for or granted. '' ( in order to grant someone relief from deportation , an immigration judge must find that the person is not a terrorist , a criminal , or someone who has engaged in fraud or misrepresentation . 
when relief from deportation is granted , no person should be subject to continued detention based merely on the attorney general 's unproven suspicions . 
require the ag to bring charges against a person who has been arrested and detained as a `` certified '' terrorist suspect within 7 days , but the law does not require that those charges be based on terrorism-related offenses . 
as a result , an alien can be treated as a terrorist suspect despite being charged with only a minor immigration violation , and may never have his or her day in court to prove otherwise . 
make material support for groups that have not been officially designated as `` terrorist organizations '' a deportable offense . 
under this law , people who make innocent donations to charitable organizations that are secretly tied to terrorist activities would be presumed guilty unless they can prove they are innocent . 
restrictions on material support should be limited to those organizations that have officially been designated terrorist organizations . 
deny legal permanent residents readmission to the u.s. based solely on speech protected by the first amendment . 
the laws punish those who `` endorse , '' `` espouse , '' or `` persuade others to support terrorist activity or terrorist organizations. '' rather than prohibiting speech that incites violence or criminal activity , these new grounds of inadmissibility punish speech that `` undermines the united states '' efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist activity. '' this language is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad , and will undeniably have a chilling effect on constitutionally protected speech . 
authorize the ag and the secretary of state to designate domestic groups as terrorist organizations and block any noncitizen who belongs to them from entering the country . 
under this provision , the mere payment of membership dues is a deportable offense . 
this vague and overly broad language constitutes guilt by association . 
our laws should punish people who commit crimes , not punish people based on their beliefs or associations . 
in addition , the current administration has taken some deeply troubling steps since september 11 . 
along with supporting the usa patriot act , it has initiated new policies and practices that negate fundamental due process protections and jeopardize basic civil liberties for noncitizens in the united states . 
these constitutionally dubious initiatives undermine our historical commitment to the fair treatment of every individual before the law and do not enhance our security . 
issued without congressional consultation or approval , these new measures include regulations that increase secrecy , limit accountability , and erode important due process principles that set our nation apart from other countries . 
i cosponsored the civil liberties restoration act , clra , reintroduced from the 108th congress by representatives howard berman and william delahunt , that seeks to roll back some of these egregious post-9/11 policies and to strike an appropriate balance between security needs and liberty interests . 
the clra would secure due process protections and civil liberties for noncitizens in the u.s. , enhance the effectiveness of our nation 's enforcement activities , restore the confidence of immigrant communities in the fairness of our government , and facilitate our efforts at promoting human rights and democracy around the world . 
while every step must be taken to protect the american public from further terrorist acts , our government must not trample on the constitution in the process and on those basic rights and protections that make american democracy so unique . 
my `` safe havens '' amendment that relates to the civil forfeiture provision of 18 u.s.c . 
981 and would add a section that would allow civil plaintiffs to attach judgments to collect compensory damages for which a terrorist organization has been adjudged liable , fortunately , was included in the text of the conference report as section 127 : it is the sense of congress that under section 981 of title 18 , united states code , victims of terrorists attacks should have access to the assets forfeited . 
this language seeks to allow victims of terrorism who obtain civil judgment for damages caused in connection with the acts to attach foreign or domestic assets held by the united states government under 18 u.s.c . 
981 ( g ) . 
section 981 ( g ) calls for the forfeiture of all assets , foreign or domestic , of any individual , entity , or organization that has engaged in planning or perpetrating any act of domestic or international terrorism against the united states , citizens or residents of the united states . 
the legislation , h.r. 3199 , as drafted , fails to deal with the current limitation on the ability to enforce civil judgments by victims and family members of victims of terrorist offenses . 
there are several examples of how the current administration has sought to bar victims from satisfying judgments obtained against the government of iran , for example . 
in the sobero case , a u.s. national was beheaded by abu sayyaf , an ai-qaeda affiliate , leaving his children fatherless . 
the administration responded to this incident by sending 1 , 000 special forces officers to track down the perpetrators , and the eldest child of the victim was invited to the state of the union address . 
abu sayyaf 's funds have been seized and are held by the u.s. treasury at this time . 
the family of the victim should have access to those funds , at the very least , at the president 's discretion . 
similarly , the administration barred the iran hostages that were held from 1979 to 1981 from satisfying their judgment against iran . 
in 2000 , the party filed a suit against iran under the terrorist state exception to the foreign sovereign immunity act . 
while a federal district court held iran to be liable , the u.s. government intervened and argued that the case should be dismissed because iran had not been designated a terrorist state at the time of the hostage incident and because of the algiers accords -- that led to the release of the hostages , which required the u.s. to bar the adjudication of suits arising from that incident . 
as a result , those hostages received no compensation for their suffering . 
similarly , american servicemen who were harmed in a libyan sponsored bombing of the la belle disco in germany were obstructed from obtaining justice for the terrorist acts they suffered . 
while victims of the attack pursued settlement of their claims against the libyan government , the administration lifted sanctions against libya without requiring as a condition the determination of all claims of american victims of terrorism . 
as a result of this action , libya abandoned all talks with the claimants . 
furthermore , because libya was no longer considered a state sponsor of terrorism , the american service men and women and their families were left without recourse to obtain justice . 
the la belle victims received no compensation for their suffering . 
in addition , a group of american prisoners who were tortured in iraq during the persian gulf war were barred from collecting their judgment from the iraqi government . 
although the 17 veterans won their case in the district court of the district of columbia , the administration argued that the iraqi assets should remain frozen in a u.s. bank account to aid in the reconstruction of iraq . 
claiming that the judgment should be overturned , the administration deems that rebuilding iraq is more important than recompensing the suffering of fighter pilots who , during their 12-year imprisonment , suffered beatings , bums , and threats of dismemberment . 
finally , the world trade center victims were barred from obtaining judgment against the iraqi government . 
in their claim against the iraqi government , the victims were awarded $ 64 million against iraq in connection with the september 2001 attacks . 
however , they were rebuffed in their efforts to attach the vested iraqi assets . 
while the judgment was sound , the second circuit court of appeals affirmed the lower court 's finding that the iraqi assets , now transferred to the u.s. treasury , were protected by u.s. sovereign immunity and were unavailable for judicial attachment . 
while the patriot act may not deserve all of the ridicule that is heaped against it , there is little doubt that the legislation has been repeatedly and seriously misused by the justice department . 
consider the following : it 's been used more than 150 times to secretly search an individual 's home , with nearly 90 percent of those cases having had nothing to do with terrorism . 
it was used against brandon mayfield , an innocent muslim american , to tap his phones , seize his property , copy his computer , spy on his children , and take his dna , all without his knowledge . 
it 's been used to deny , on account of his political beliefs , the admission to the united states of a swiss citizen and prominent muslim scholar to teach at notre dame university . 
its been used to unconstitutionally coerce an internet service provider to divulge information about e-mail activity and web surfing on its system , and then to gag that provider from even disclosing the abuse to the public . 
because of gag restrictions , we will never know how many times its been used to obtain reading records from library and book stores , but we do know that libraries have been solicited by the department of justice -- voluntarily or under threat of the patriot act -- for reader information on more than 200 occasions since september 11 . 
it 's been used to charge , detain and prosecute a muslim student in idaho for posting internet website links to objectionable materials , even though the same links were available on the u.s. government 's website . 
even worse than the patriot act has been the unilateral abuse of power by the administration . 
since september 11 , our government has detained and verbally and physically abused thousands of immigrants without time limit , for unknown and unspecified reasons , and targeted tens of thousands of arab-americans for intensive interrogations and immigration screenings . 
all this serves to accomplish is to alienate muslim and arab-americans -- the key groups to fighting terrorism in our own county -- who see a justice department that has institutionalized racial and ethnic profiling , without the benefit of a single terrorism conviction . 
nor is it helpful when our government condones the torture of prisoners at home and abroad , authorizes the monitoring of mosques and religious sites without any indication of criminal activity , and detains scores of individuals as material witnesses because it does not have evidence to indict them . 
this makes our citizens less safe not more safe , and undermines our role as a beacon of democracy and freedom . 
right now , h.r. 3199 is the most appropriate and timely vehicle in which to address this issue and allow u.s. victims of terrorism to obtain justice from terrorist-supporting or terrorist-housing nations . 
madam speaker , i oppose this legislation and ask that my colleagues work to negotiate real fixes to the sunsetted provisions . 
