Editing Patriot Act (section)

== Titles ==
[[File:U.S. President George W. Bush delivers remarks and signs the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (October 26, 2001).webm|thumb|President George W. Bush in October 2001, elucidating the government's rationale behind the USA PATRIOT Act before signing into law]]

=== Title I: Enhancing domestic security against terrorism ===
{{Main|Title I of the Patriot Act}}
Title I of the Patriot Act authorizes measures to enhance the ability of domestic security services to prevent terrorism. The title established a fund for counter-terrorist activities and increased funding for the Terrorist Screening Center which is administered by the FBI. The military was authorized to provide assistance in some situations that involve weapons of mass destruction when so requested by the [[United States Attorney General|Attorney General]]. The National Electronic Crime Task Force was expanded, along with the [[President of the United States|President]]'s authority and abilities in cases of terrorism. The title also condemned the discrimination against Arab and Muslim Americans that happened soon after the September 11 terrorist attacks. The impetus for many of the provisions came from earlier bills, for instance the condemnation of discrimination was originally proposed by Senator [[Tom Harkin]] ([[Democratic Party (United States)|D]]-[[Iowa|IA]]) in an amendment to the ''Combatting Terrorism Act of 2001'', though in a different form. It originally included "the prayer of [[Cardinal (Catholicism)|Cardinal]] [[Theodore Edgar McCarrick|Theodore McCarrick]], the [[Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington|Archbishop of Washington]] in a [[Mass (liturgy)|Mass]] on September 12, 2001 for our Nation and the victims in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist hijackings and attacks in New York City, [[Washington, D.C.]], and [[Pennsylvania]] reminds all Americans that 'We must seek the guilty and not strike out against the innocent or we become like them who are without moral guidance or proper direction.'"<ref>{{USCongRec|2001|S9368|September 11, 2001}}</ref> Further condemnation of racial vilification and violence is also spelled out in Title X, where there was condemnation of such activities against [[Sikh]] Americans, who were mistaken for Muslims after the September 11 terrorist attack.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1002.</ref>

=== Title II: Enhanced surveillance procedures ===
{{Main|Title II of the Patriot Act}}
Title II is titled "Enhanced Surveillance Procedures" and covers all aspects of the surveillance of suspected terrorists, those suspected of engaging in computer fraud or abuse, and agents of a foreign power who are engaged in clandestine activities. It primarily made amendments to FISA and the ECPA; furthermore, many of the most controversial aspects of the USA PATRIOT Act reside in this title. In particular, the title allows government agencies to gather "foreign intelligence information" from both U.S. and non-U.S. citizens and changed FISA to make gaining foreign intelligence information the significant purpose of FISA-based surveillance, where previously it had been the primary purpose.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 218.</ref> The change in definition was meant to remove a legal "wall" between criminal investigations and surveillance for the purposes of gathering foreign intelligence, which hampered investigations when criminal and foreign surveillance overlapped.<ref>[[Andrew C. McCarthy]], [https://web.archive.org/web/20050408075649/http://www.patriotdebates.com/218-2#opening "Why Section 218 Should be Retained"]. Retrieved January 23, 2006. ''The Patriot Debates''.</ref> However, that this wall even existed was found by the Federal Surveillance Court of Review to have actually been a long-held misinterpretation by government agencies. Also removed was the statutory requirement that the government prove a surveillance target under FISA is a non-U.S. citizen and agent of a foreign power, though it did require that any investigations must not be undertaken on citizens who are carrying out activities protected by the First Amendment.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 214.</ref> The title also expanded the duration of FISA physical search and surveillance orders,<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 207.</ref> and gave authorities the ability to share information gathered before a federal grand jury with other agencies.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 203.</ref>

The scope and availability of wiretapping and surveillance orders were expanded under Title II. Wiretaps were expanded to include addressing and routing information to allow surveillance of [[packet switched network]]s<ref name="Section216">USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 216.</ref>—the [[Electronic Privacy Information Center]] (EPIC) objected to this, arguing that it does not take into account email or web addresses, which often contain content in the address information.<ref>[http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot/ Analysis of Specific USA PATRIOT Act Provisions: Pen Registers, the Internet and Carnivore] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071015172827/http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot/ |date=October 15, 2007 }}, [[Electronic Privacy Information Center]]. Accessed December 4, 2005.</ref> The Act allowed any district court judge in the United States to issue such surveillance orders<ref name="Section216" /> and search warrants for terrorism investigations.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 219.</ref> Search warrants were also expanded, with the Act amending Title III of the ''Stored Communications Access Act'' to allow the FBI to gain access to stored voicemail through a search warrant, rather than through the more stringent wiretap laws.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 204 & 209.</ref>

Various provisions allowed for the disclosure of electronic communications to law enforcement agencies. Those who operate or own a "protected computer" can give permission for authorities to intercept communications carried out on the machine, thus bypassing the requirements of the Wiretap statute.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 217.</ref> The definition of a "protected computer" is defined in {{usc-clause|18|1030|(e)(2)}} and broadly encompasses those computers used in interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including ones located outside the United States. The law governing obligatory and voluntary disclosure of customer communications by [[Cable television|cable]] companies was altered to allow agencies to demand such communications under U.S.C. Title 18 provisions relating to the disclosure of electronic communications (chapter 119), [[pen register]]s and [[trap and trace device]]s (chapter 206) and stored communications (121), though it excluded the disclosure of cable subscriber viewing habits.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 211.</ref> [[Subpoena]]s issued to [[Internet Service Providers]] were expanded to include not only "the name, address, local and long distance telephone toll billing records, telephone number or other subscriber number or identity, and length of service of a subscriber" but also session times and durations, types of services used, communication device address information (e.g. [[IP address]]es), payment method and bank account and credit card numbers.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 210.</ref> Communication providers are also allowed to disclose customer records or communications if they suspect there is a danger to "life and limb".<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 212.</ref>

Title II established three very controversial provisions: [[Sneak and peek warrant|"sneak and peek"]] warrants, [[roving wiretap]]s and the ability of the FBI to gain access to documents that reveal the patterns of U.S. citizens. The so-called "sneak and peek" law allowed for delayed notification of the execution of search warrants. The period before which the FBI must notify the recipients of the order was unspecified in the Act—the FBI field manual says that it is a "flexible standard"<ref>[http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/DOJ_guidance.pdf Field Guidance on New Authorities (Redacted)], [[Federal Bureau of Investigation]] (hosted by the [[Electronic Privacy Information Center]]). Retrieved September 24, 2007.</ref>—and it may be extended at the court's discretion.<ref name="Section213">USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 213.</ref> These sneak and peek provisions were struck down by judge [[Ann Aiken]] on September 26, 2007, after a [[Portland, Oregon|Portland]] attorney, [[Brandon Mayfield]], was wrongly jailed because of the searches. The court found the searches to violate the provision that prohibits unreasonable searches in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.<ref name="SneakAndPeakStruckDownWired">{{cite magazine|magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]|url=http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/09/court-strikes-2.html|title=Court Strikes Down 2 Key Patriot Act Provisions|date=September 26, 2007|first=Ryan|last=Singel}}</ref><ref name="SneakAndPeakStruckDownNYT">{{cite news|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/washington/27patriot.html?ref=us|title=Judge Rules Provisions in Patriot Act to Be Illegal|first=Susan Jo|last=Keller|date=September 27, 2007}}</ref>

Roving wiretaps are wiretap orders that do not need to specify all common carriers and third parties in a surveillance court order. These are seen as important by the Department of Justice because they believe that terrorists can exploit wiretap orders by rapidly changing locations and communication devices such as cell phones,<ref>[[United States Department of Justice]], [http://www.lifeandliberty.gov/what_is_the_patriot_act.pdf The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving Life and Liberty], pg. 2. Retrieved September 24, 2007. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090309172100/http://www.lifeandliberty.gov/what_is_the_patriot_act.pdf |date=March 9, 2009 }}</ref> while opponents see it as violating the particularity clause of the [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourth Amendment]].<ref>James Dempsey, [http://www.patriotdebates.com/206-2#opening "Why Section 206 Should be Modified"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070113014056/http://www.patriotdebates.com/206-2 |date=January 13, 2007 }} (undated), accessed January 7, 2006.</ref><ref name="EFFSection206">{{cite web|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060605152308/https://www.eff.org/patriot/sunset/206.php|url=https://www.eff.org/patriot/sunset/206.php|archive-date=June 5, 2006|title=Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT – Section 206|publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation|access-date=December 21, 2011}}</ref> Another highly controversial provision is one that allows the FBI to make an order "requiring the production of any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items) for an investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution."<ref name="Section215">USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 215.</ref> Though it was not targeted directly at libraries, the [[American Library Association]] (ALA), in particular, opposed this provision.<ref>{{cite journal|ssrn=901266 |title=Phillips, Heather A., "Libraries and National Security Law: An Examination of the USA Patriot Act". Progressive Librarian, Vol. 25, Summer 2005 |publisher=Papers.ssrn.com |date= May 17, 2006|last1=Phillips |first1=Heather A. }}</ref> In a resolution passed on June 29, 2005, they stated that "Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act allows the government to secretly request and obtain library records for large numbers of individuals without any reason to believe they are involved in illegal activity."<ref>[[American Library Association]], [http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=ifresolutions&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=101514 Resolution on the USA PATRIOT Act and Libraries], enacted June 29, 2005</ref>

The title also covers a number of other miscellaneous provisions, including the expansion of the number of FISC judges from seven to eleven (three of which must reside within {{convert|20|mi}} of the [[Washington, D.C.|District of Columbia]]),<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 208.</ref> trade [[Sanctions against North Korea]] and [[Taliban]]-controlled [[Afghanistan]]<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 221.</ref> and the employment of [[Translation|translators]] by the FBI.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 205.</ref>

At the insistence of Republican Representative [[Dick Armey|Richard Armey]],<ref>{{cite news|last=O'Harrow, Jr.|first=Robert|title=Six Weeks in Autumn|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A1999-2002Oct22&notFound=true|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|page=W06|date=October 27, 2002|access-date=July 11, 2008}}{{dead link|date=June 2021|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> the Act had a number of [[sunset provision]]s built in, which were originally set to expire on December 31, 2005. The sunset provision of the Act also took into account any ongoing foreign intelligence investigations and allowed them to continue once the sections had expired.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Sec. 224.</ref>
The provisions that were to expire are below.

=== Title III: Anti-money-laundering to prevent terrorism ===
{{Main|Title III of the Patriot Act}}
Title III of the Act, titled "International Money Laundering Abatement and Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001," is intended to facilitate the prevention, detection, and prosecution of international [[money laundering]] and the financing of [[terrorism]]. It primarily amends portions of the ''[[Money Laundering Control Act of 1986]]'' (MLCA) and the ''[[Bank Secrecy Act of 1970]]'' (BSA). It was divided into three subtitles. The first subtitle deals primarily with strengthening banking rules against money laundering, especially on the international stage. The second subtitle attempts to improve communication between law enforcement agencies and financial institutions, as well as expanding recordkeeping and reporting requirements. The third subtitle deals with currency smuggling and counterfeiting, including quadrupling the maximum penalty for counterfeiting foreign currency.

The first subtitle also tightened the recordkeeping requirements for financial institutions, making them record the aggregate amounts of transactions processed from areas of the world where money laundering is a concern to the U.S. government. It even made institutions put into place reasonable steps to identify [[beneficial owner]]s of bank accounts and those who are authorized to use or route funds through [[payable-through account]]s.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 311.</ref>
The U.S. Department of Treasury was charged with formulating regulations intended to foster information sharing between financial institutions to prevent money-laundering.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 314.</ref>
Along with expanding record keeping requirements, it put new regulations into place to make it easier for authorities to identify money laundering activities and to make it harder for money launderers to mask their identities.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 317.</ref>
If money laundering was uncovered, the subtitle legislated for the [[asset forfeiture|forfeiture of assets]] of those suspected of doing the money laundering.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 312, 313, 319 & 325.</ref>
In an effort to encourage institutions to take steps that would reduce money laundering, the Treasury was given authority to block mergers of [[bank holding company|bank holding companies]] and [[bank]]s with other banks and bank holding companies that had a bad history of preventing money laundering. Similarly, mergers between insured depository institutions and non-insured depository institutions that have a bad track record in combating money-laundering could be blocked.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 327.</ref>

Restrictions were placed on accounts and foreign banks. It prohibited [[shell bank]]s that are not an affiliate of a bank that has a physical presence in the U.S. or that are not subject to supervision by a banking authority in a non-U.S. country. It also prohibits or restricts the use of certain accounts held at financial institutions.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 313.</ref>
Financial institutions must now undertake steps to identify the owners of any privately owned bank outside the U.S. who have a [[correspondent account]] with them, along with the interests of each of the owners in the bank. It is expected that additional scrutiny will be applied by the U.S. institution to such banks to make sure they are not engaging in money laundering. Banks must identify all the nominal and beneficial owners of any private bank account opened and maintained in the U.S. by non-U.S. citizens. There is also an expectation that they must undertake enhanced scrutiny of the account if it is owned by, or is being maintained on behalf of, any senior [[politician|political figure]] where there is reasonable suspicion of [[political corruption|corruption]].<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 312.</ref>
Any deposits made from within the U.S. into foreign banks are now deemed to have been deposited into any [[interbank network|interbank account]] the foreign bank may have in the U.S. Thus any [[injunction|restraining order]], seizure warrant or [[arrest warrant]] may be made against the funds in the interbank account held at a U.S. financial institution, up to the amount deposited in the account at the foreign bank.<ref name="Section319">USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 319. Amended {{usc-clause|31|5318|(k)(3)(C)(iii)}}</ref>
Restrictions were placed on the use of internal bank [[concentration account]]s because such accounts do not provide an effective [[audit trail]] for transactions, and this may be used to facilitate money laundering. Financial institutions are prohibited from allowing clients to specifically direct them to move funds into, out of, or through a concentration account, and they are also prohibited from informing their clients about the existence of such accounts. Financial institutions are not allowed to provide any information to clients that may identify such internal accounts.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 325.</ref>
Financial institutions are required to document and follow methods of identifying where the funds are for each customer in a concentration account that co-mingles funds belonging to one or more customers.

The definition of money laundering was expanded to include making a financial transaction in the U.S. in order to commit a violent crime;<ref>Amendment made to {{usc-clause|18|1956|(c)(7)(B)(ii)}}—for some reason an extra parenthesis was inserted into {{usc-clause|18|1956|(c)(7)(B)(iii)}}, according to [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1956-#FN-1 Cornell University], this was probably mistakenly added by law makers</ref> the bribery of public officials and fraudulent dealing with public funds; the smuggling or illegal export of controlled munition<ref>Illegal export of controlled munitions is defined in the United States Munitions List, which is part of the ''[[Arms Export Control Act]]'' ({{usc|22|2778}})</ref> and the importation or bringing in of any firearm or ammunition not authorized by the U.S. Attorney General<ref>See {{usc-clause|18|922|(l)}} and {{usc-clause|18|925|(d)}}</ref> and the smuggling of any item controlled under the Export Administration Regulations.<ref>Defined in 15 [[Code of Federal Regulations|CFR]] 730–774</ref><ref name="Section315">USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 315.</ref>
It also includes any offense where the U.S. would be obligated under a [[mutual treaty]] with a foreign nation to [[extradition|extradite]] a person, or where the U.S. would need to submit a case against a person for prosecution because of the treaty; the import of falsely classified goods;<ref>Defined in {{usc|18|541}}</ref> [[computer crime]];<ref>Defined in {{usc|18|1030}}</ref> and any [[felony]] violation of the ''[[Foreign Agents Registration Act|Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938]]''.<ref name="Section315" />
It also allows the forfeiture of any property within the jurisdiction of the United States that was gained as the result of an offense against a foreign nation that involves the manufacture, importation, sale, or distribution of a controlled substance.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 320. Amended {{usc-clause|18|981|(A)(1)(B)}}</ref>
Foreign nations may now seek to have a forfeiture or judgment notification enforced by a district court of the United States.<ref name="Section323">USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 323. Amended {{usc|28|2467}}</ref>
This is done through new legislation that specifies how the U.S. government may apply for a restraining order<ref>Pursuant to {{usc-clause|18|983|(j)}}</ref> to preserve the availability of property which is subject to a foreign forfeiture or confiscation judgement.<ref>{{usc-clause|28|2467|(d)(3)(A)}}</ref>
In taking into consideration such an application, emphasis is placed on the ability of a foreign court to follow [[due process]].<ref name="Section323" /> The Act also requires the Secretary of Treasury to take all reasonable steps to encourage foreign governments make it a requirement to include the name of the originator in [[wire transfer]] instructions sent to the United States and other countries, with the information to remain with the transfer from its origination until the point of disbursement.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 328.</ref>
The Secretary was also ordered to encourage international cooperation in investigations of money laundering, [[financial crimes]], and the finances of terrorist groups.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Sec. 330.</ref>

The Act also introduced criminal penalties for corrupt officialdom. An official or employee of the government who acts corruptly—as well as the person who induces the corrupt act—in the carrying out of their official duties will be fined by an amount that is not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the bribe in question. Alternatively they may be imprisoned for not more than 15 years, or they may be fined and imprisoned. Penalties apply to financial institutions who do not comply with an order to terminate any corresponding accounts within 10 days of being so ordered by the Attorney General or the Secretary of Treasury. The financial institution can be fined [[United States dollar|$US]]10,000 for each day the account remains open after the 10-day limit has expired.<ref name="Section319" />

The second annotation made a number of modifications to the BSA in an attempt to make it harder for money launderers to operate and easier for law enforcement and regulatory agencies to police money laundering operations. One amendment made to the BSA was to allow the designated officer or agency who receives [[suspicious activity report]]s to notify U.S. intelligence agencies.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 356.</ref>
A number of amendments were made to address issues related to record keeping and financial reporting. One measure was a new requirement that anyone who does business file a report for any coin and foreign currency receipts that are over US$10,000 and made it illegal to structure transactions in a manner that evades the BSA's reporting requirements.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 365.</ref>
To make it easier for authorities to regulate and investigate anti-money laundering operations Money Services Businesses (MSBs)—those who operate [[informal value transfer system]]s outside of the mainstream financial system—were included in the definition of a financial institution.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 359.</ref> The BSA was amended to make it mandatory to report suspicious transactions and an attempt was made to make such reporting easier for financial institutions.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 352, 354 & 365.</ref>
[[Financial Crimes Enforcement Network|FinCEN]] was made a [[government agency|bureau]] of the [[United States Department of Treasury]]<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 361.</ref> and the creation of a secure [[computer network|network]] to be used by financial institutions to report suspicious transactions and to provide alerts of relevant suspicious activities was ordered.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 362.</ref> Along with these reporting requirements, a considerable number of provisions relate to the prevention and prosecution of money-laundering.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 352.</ref> Financial institutions were ordered to establish anti-money laundering programs and the BSA was amended to better define anti-money laundering strategy.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 354.</ref> Also increased were civil and criminal penalties for money laundering and the introduction of penalties for violations of [[geographic targeting order]]s and certain record-keeping requirements.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 353.</ref> A number of other amendments to the BSA were made through subtitle B, including granting the [[Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System]] power to authorize personnel to act as law enforcement officers to protect the premises, grounds, property and personnel of any U.S. National reserve bank and allowing the Board to delegate this authority to U.S. Federal reserve bank.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 364.</ref> Another measure instructed United States Executive Directors of international financial institutions to use their voice and vote to support any country that has taken action to support the U.S.'s War on Terrorism. Executive Directors are now required to provide ongoing auditing of disbursements made from their institutions to ensure that no funds are paid to persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle B, Sec. 360.</ref>

The third subtitle deals with currency crimes. Largely because of the effectiveness of the BSA, money launders had been avoiding traditional financial institutions to launder money and were using cash-based businesses to avoid them. A new effort was made to stop the laundering of money through bulk currency movements, mainly focusing on the confiscation of criminal proceeds and the increase in penalties for money laundering. Congress found that a criminal offense of merely evading the reporting of money transfers was insufficient and decided that it would be better if the smuggling of the bulk currency itself was the offense. Therefore, the BSA was amended to make it a criminal offense to evade currency reporting by concealing more than US$10,000 on any person or through any luggage, merchandise or other container that moves into or out of the U.S. The penalty for such an offense is up to 5 years' imprisonment and the forfeiture of any property up to the amount that was being smuggled.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle C, Sec. 371.</ref> It also made the civil and criminal penalty violations of currency reporting cases<ref>So defined in {{usc|31|5313}}, {{usc|31|5316}} and {{usc|31|5324}}</ref> be the forfeiture of all a defendant's property that was involved in the offense, and any property traceable to the defendant.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle C, Sec. 372. Amended {{usc-clause|31|5317|(c)}}</ref> The Act prohibits and penalizes those who run unlicensed money transmitting businesses.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle C, Sec. 371. Amended {{usc|18|1960}}</ref> In 2005, this provision of the USA PATRIOT Act was used to prosecute Yehuda Abraham for helping to arrange money transfers for British arms dealer [[Hemant Lakhani]], who was arrested in August 2003 after being caught in a government sting. Lakhani had tried to sell a missile to an FBI agent posing as a [[Somalia|Somali]] militant.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4756706|title=The Patriot Act: Justice Department Claims Success|date=July 20, 2005|publisher=[[National Public Radio]]}}</ref> The definition of counterfeiting was expanded to encompass analog, digital or electronic image reproductions, and it was made an offense to own such a reproduction device. Penalties were increased to 20 years' imprisonment.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle C, Sec. 374. Amended {{usc|18|1960}}</ref> Money laundering "unlawful activities" was expanded to include the [[provision of material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations]].<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle C, Sec. 376. Amended {{usc-clause|18|1956|(c)(7)(D)}}</ref> The Act specifies that anyone who commits or conspires to undertake a fraudulent activity [[extraterritorial jurisdiction|outside the jurisdiction]] of the United States, and which would be an offense in the U.S., will be prosecuted under {{usc|18|1029}}, which deals with fraud and related activity in connection with access devices.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle C, Sec. 377.</ref>

=== Title IV: Border security ===
{{Main|Title IV of the Patriot Act}}
Title IV of the Patriot Act amends the ''[[Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952]]'' to give more law enforcement and investigative power to the U.S. Attorney General and to the [[Immigration and Naturalization Service]] (INS). The Attorney General was authorized to waive any cap on the number of full-time [[employee]]s (FTEs) assigned to the INS on the [[Canada–United States border|Northern border]] of the United States.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle A, Sec. 401.</ref> Enough funds were set aside to triple the maximum number of [[United States Border Patrol|U.S. Border Patrol]] personnel, Customs Service personnel and INS inspectors along with an additional US$50,000,000 funding for the INS and the [[United States Customs Service|U.S. Customs Service]] to improve technology for monitoring the Northern Border and acquiring additional equipment at the Canadian northern border.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle A, Sec. 402.</ref> The INS was also given the authority to authorize overtime payments of up to an extra US$30,000 a year to INS employees.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle A, Sec. 404. Amended the ''[[Department of Justice Appropriations Act, 2001]]''.</ref> Access was given to the [[United States Department of State|U.S. State Department]] and the INS to criminal background information contained in the [[National Crime Information Center's Interstate Identification Index]] (NCIC-III), [https://web.archive.org/web/20080511195200/http://www.amw.com/fugitives/most_wanted_lists.cfm Wanted Persons File] and any other files maintained by the [[National Crime Information Center]] to determine whether [[visa (document)|visa]] applicants and applicants could be admitted to the U.S.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle A, Sec. 403. Amends {{usc|8|1105}}</ref> The U.S. Department of State was required to form final regulations governing the procedures for taking fingerprints and the conditions with which the department was allowed to use this information.<ref name="FinalRegulationsFingerPrints">USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Sec. 403. Final regulations are specified in {{USCFR|22|40|5}}</ref> Additionally, the [[National Institute of Standards and Technology]] (NIST) was ordered to develop a technology standard to verify the identity of persons applying for a United States visa.<ref name="FinalRegulationsFingerPrints" /> The reason was to make the standard the technology basis for a cross-agency, the cross-platform electronic system used for conducting [[background check]]s, confirming identities and ensuring that people have not received visas under different names.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle A, Sec. 405.</ref> This report was released on November 13, 2002;<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2021/10/25/nist_appendix_pact_nov02.pdf|title=Summary Of NIST Standards For Biometic Accuary, Tamper Resistance, And Interroperability|website=National Institute Of Standards And Technology|date=November 13, 2022}}</ref> however, according to NIST, this was later "determined that the fingerprint system used was not as accurate as current state-of-the-art fingerprint systems and is approximately equivalent to commercial fingerprint systems available in 1998."<ref>[http://www.itl.nist.gov/iad/vip/fing/fing.html NIST Image Group's Fingerprint Research] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071226024522/http://www.itl.nist.gov/iad/vip/fing/fing.html |date=December 26, 2007 }}, see the section "NIST Patriot Act Work" (accessed June 28, 2006)</ref> This report was later superseded by section 303(a) of the ''[[Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002]]''.

Under Subtitle B, various definitions relating to terrorism were altered and expanded. The INA was [[Retroactive legislation|retroactively]] amended to disallow aliens who are part of or representatives of a foreign organization or any group who endorses acts of terrorism from entering the U.S. This restriction also included the family of such aliens.<ref name="Section411">USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle B, Sec. 411.</ref> The definition of "terrorist activity" was strengthened to include actions involving the use of any dangerous device (and not just explosives and firearms).<ref name="Section411" /> To "engage in terrorist activity" is defined as committing, inciting to commit or planning and preparing to undertake an act of terrorism. Included in this definition is the gathering of intelligence information on potential terrorist targets, the solicitation of funds for a terrorist organization or the solicitation of others to undertake acts of terrorism. Those who provide knowing assistance to a person who is planning to perform such activities are defined as undertaking terrorist activities. Such assistance includes affording material support, including a [[safe house]], transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including [[chemical warfare|chemical]], [[biological warfare|biological]], or [[radiological weapon]]s), explosives, or training to perform the terrorist act.<ref name="Section411" /> The INA criteria for making a decision to designate an organization as a terrorist organization was amended to include the definition of a terrorist act.<ref>As specified in section 140(d)(2) of the ''[[Foreign Relations Authorization Act]]'', Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989; see {{usc-clause|22|2656f|(d)(2)}}</ref> Though the amendments to these definitions are retroactive, it does not mean that it can be applied to members who joined an organization, but since left, before it was designated to be a terrorist organization under {{usc|8|1189}} by the Secretary of State.<ref name="Section411" />

The Act amended the INA to add new provisions enforcing mandatory detention laws. These apply to any alien who is engaged in terrorism, or who is engaged in an activity that endangers U.S. national security. It also applies to those who are inadmissible or who must be deported because it is certified they are attempting to enter to undertake illegal [[espionage]]; are exporting goods, technology, or sensitive information illegally; or are attempting to control or overthrow the government; or have, or will have, engaged in terrorist activities.<ref name="Section412">USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle B, Sec. 412. A new section was created by the Act—{{usc|8|1226a}}</ref> The Attorney General or the Attorney General's deputy may maintain custody of such aliens until they are removed from the U.S. unless it is no longer deemed they should be removed, in which case they are released. The alien can be detained for up to 90 days but can be held up to six months after it is deemed that they are a national security threat. However, the alien must be charged with a crime or removal proceedings start no longer than seven days after the alien's detention, otherwise the alien will be released. However, such detentions must be reviewed every six months by the Attorney General, who can then decide to revoke it, unless prevented from doing so by law. Every six months the alien may apply, in writing, for the certification to be reconsidered.<ref name="Section412" /> [[Judicial review]] of any action or decision relating to this section, including judicial review of the merits of a certification, can be held under [[habeas corpus]] proceedings. Such proceedings can be initiated by an application filed with the [[United States Supreme Court]], by any justice of the Supreme Court, by any [[circuit court|circuit judge]] of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit]], or by any [[United States district court|district court]] otherwise having jurisdiction to entertain the application. The final order is subject to [[appeal]] to the [[United States Court of Appeals]] for the District of Columbia Circuit.<ref name="Section412" /> Provisions were also made for a report to be required every six months of such decisions from the U.S. Attorney General to the [[Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives]] and the [[Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate]].<ref name="Section412" />

A sense of Congress was given that the U.S. Secretary of State should expedite the full implementation of the integrated entry and exit data system for airports, seaports, and land border ports of entry specified in the ''[[Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996]]'' (IIRIRA). They also found that the U.S. Attorney General should immediately start the Integrated Entry and Exit Data System Task Force specified in section 3 of the ''[[Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 2000]]''. Congress wanted the primary focus of development of the entry-exit data system was to be on the utilization of biometric technology and the development of tamper-resistant documents readable at ports of entry. They also wanted the system to be able to interface with existing law enforcement databases.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle B, Sec. 414.</ref> The Attorney General was ordered to implement and expand the foreign student monitoring program that was established under section 641(a) of the IIRIRA.<ref>{{usc-clause|8|1372|(a)}}</ref> which records the date and port of entry of each foreign student. The program was expanded to include other approved educational institutions, including air flight schools, language training schools or vocational schools that are approved by the Attorney General, in consultation with the [[United States Secretary of Education|Secretary of Education]] and the Secretary of State. US$36,800,000 was appropriated for the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] to spend on implementing the program.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle B, Sec. 416.</ref>

The Secretary of State was ordered to audit and report back to Congress on the Visa waiver program specified under {{usc|8|1187}} for each fiscal year until September 30, 2007. The Secretary was also ordered to check for the implementation of precautionary measures to prevent the counterfeiting and theft of passports as well as ascertain that countries designated under the visa waiver program have established a program to develop tamper-resistant passports.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle B, Sec. 417.</ref> The Secretary was also ordered to report back to Congress on whether [[consulate shopping]] was a problem.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle B, Sec. 418.</ref>

The last subtitle, which was introduced by Senators John Conyers and Patrick Leahy, allows for the preservation of immigration benefits for victims of terrorism, and the families of victims of terrorism.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV, Subtitle C.</ref> They recognized that some families, through no fault of their own, would either be ineligible for permanent residence in the United States because of being unable to make important deadlines because of the September 11 terrorist attacks, or had become ineligible to apply for special immigration status because their loved one died in the attacks.<ref>Office of [[Patrick Leahy]], [http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200110/102401a.html USA PATRIOT Act Section-by-section analysis] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100213025652/http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200110/102401a.html |date=February 13, 2010 }}</ref>

=== Title V: Removing obstacles to investigating terrorism ===
{{Main|Title V of the Patriot Act}}

Title V allows the U.S. Attorney General to pay rewards pursuant of advertisements for assistance to the Department of Justice to combat terrorism and prevent terrorist acts, though amounts over $US250,000 may not be made or offered without the personal approval of the Attorney General or President, and once the award is approved the Attorney General must give written notice to the Chairman and ranking minority members of the Committee on Appropriations and the Judiciary of the Senate and of the House of Representatives.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 501.</ref> The ''[[State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956]]'' was amended to allow the U.S. State Department to offer rewards, in consultation with the Attorney General, for the full or significant dismantling of any terrorist organization<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 502. Amended {{usc-clause|22|2708|(b)(5)}}</ref> and to identify any key leaders of terrorist organizations.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 502. Amended {{usc-clause|22|2708|(b)(6)}}</ref> The U.S. Secretary of State was given authority to pay greater than $US5&nbsp;million if he so determines it would prevent terrorist actions against the United States and Canada.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 502. Amended {{usc-clause|22|2708|(e)(1)}}</ref> The ''[[DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act]]'' was amended to include terrorism or crimes of violence in the list of qualifying Federal offenses.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 503. Amended {{usc-clause|42|14135a|(d)(2)}}</ref> Another perceived obstacle was to allow federal agencies to share information with federal law enforcement agencies. Thus, the act now allows federal officers who acquire information through electronic surveillance or physical searches to consult with federal law enforcement officers to coordinate efforts to investigate or protect against potential or actual attacks, sabotage or international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 504. Amended {{usc|50|1825}}</ref>

[[United States Secret Service|U.S. Secret Service]] jurisdiction was extended to investigate computer fraud, access device frauds, false identification documents or devices, or any fraudulent activities against U.S. financial institutions.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 506.</ref> The ''[[General Education Provisions Act]]'' was amended to allow the U.S. Attorney General or Assistant Attorney General to collect and retain educational records relevant to an authorized investigation or prosecution of an offense that is defined as a Federal crime of terrorism and which an educational agency or institution possesses. The Attorney General or Assistant Attorney General must "certify that there are specific and articulable facts giving reason to believe that the education records are likely to contain information [that a Federal crime of terrorism may be being committed]." An education institution that produces education records in response to such a request is given legal immunity from any liability that rises from such a production of records.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 507.</ref>

One of the most controversial aspects of the USA PATRIOT Act is in Title V, and relates to [[National Security Letter]]s (NSLs). An NSL is a form of [[administrative subpoena]] used by the FBI, and reportedly by other U.S. government agencies including the CIA and the [[United States Department of Defense|U.S. Department of Defense]] (DoD). It is a demand letter issued to a particular entity or organization to turn over various records and data pertaining to individuals. They require no probable cause or judicial oversight and also contain a [[gag order]], preventing the recipient of the letter from disclosing that the letter was ever issued. Title V allowed the use of NSLs to be made by a Special Agent in charge of a Bureau field office, where previously only the director or the deputy assistant director of the FBI were able to certify such requests.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title V, Sec 505. Amended {{usc-clause|18|2709|(b)}}; Section 1114(a)(5)(A) of the ''[[Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978]]'' ({{usc-clause|12|3414|(a)(5)(A)}}) and Section 624 of the ''[[Fair Credit Reporting Act]]'' ({{usc|15|1681u}}).</ref> This provision of the Act was challenged by the ACLU on behalf of an unknown party against the U.S. government on the grounds that NSLs violate the First and Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution because there is no way to legally oppose an NSL subpoena in court, and that it was unconstitutional not to allow a client to inform their Attorney as to the order because of the gag provision of the letters. The court's judgement found in favour of the ACLU's case, and they declared the law unconstitutional.<ref name="ACLUvDoJ">''Doe v. Ashcroft'', 334 F.Supp.2d 471 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) [http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/rulings/04CV2614_Opinion_092904.pdf source] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041218201531/http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/rulings/04CV2614_Opinion_092904.pdf |date=December 18, 2004 }}</ref> Later, the USA PATRIOT Act was reauthorized and amendments were made to specify a process of judicial review of NSLs and to allow the recipient of an NSL to disclose receipt of the letter to an attorney or others necessary to comply with or challenge the order.<ref>USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (U.S. [[United States House of Representatives|H.R.]] 3199, Public Law 109-177) Title I, Sec. 115 & 116</ref>
However, in 2007, the U.S. District Court struck down even the reauthorized NSLs because the gag power was unconstitutional as courts could still not engage in a meaningful judicial review of these gags. On August 28, 2015, Judge Victor Marrero of the federal district court in Manhattan ruled the gag order of [[Nicholas Merrill]] was unjustified. In his decision, Judge Marrero described the FBI's position as, "extreme and overly broad," affirming that "courts cannot, consistent with the First Amendment, simply accept the Government's assertions that disclosure would implicate and create a risk." He also found that the FBI's gag order on Mr. Merrill "implicates serious issues, both with respect to the First Amendment and accountability of the government to the people."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://isp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/page-attachments/merrill_v._lynch_-_unredacted_decision_vacating_gag_order.pdf#page=32 |page=32 |website=Isp.yale.edu |title=Gag Order |access-date=June 24, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171202072615/https://isp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/page-attachments/merrill_v._lynch_-_unredacted_decision_vacating_gag_order.pdf#page=32 |archive-date=December 2, 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Initially, the ruling was released in [[redaction]] by Judge Marrero. The FBI was given 90 days to pursue any other alternative course of action but elected not to do so. Upon release of the unredacted ruling on November 30, 2015, it was revealed for the first time the extent to which the FBI's NSL accompanied by a gag order sought to collect information. Through the court documents, it was revealed for the first time that through an NSL, the FBI believes it can legally obtain information including an individual's complete [[web browsing history]], the [[IP addresses]] of everyone a person has corresponded with, and all the records of all online purchases within the last 180 days. The FBI also claims via the extension of an NSL, it can obtain [[cell site]] location information. In the landmark case of Nicholas Merrill the FBI in specific sought to seek the following information on an account: DSL account information, radius log, subscriber name and related subscriber information, account number, date the account opened or closed, addresses associated with the account, subscriber day/evening telephone numbers, screen names or other on-line names associated with the account, order forms, records relating to merchandise orders/shipping information for the last 180 days, all billing related to the account, [[internet service provider]] (ISP), all email addresses associated with the account, internet protocol address assigned to the account, all website information registered to the account, uniform resource locator address assigned to the account, any other information which you consider to be an electronic communication transactional record. This was the first time it was revealed the extent to which an NSL under the Patriot Act could request communication information.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://isp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/page-attachments/merrill_v._lynch_-_unredacted_decision_vacating_gag_order.pdf |website=Isp.yale.edu |title=Nicholas Merrill v. Loretta E. Lynch |access-date=June 24, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171202072615/https://isp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/page-attachments/merrill_v._lynch_-_unredacted_decision_vacating_gag_order.pdf |archive-date=December 2, 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://isp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/page-attachments/merrill_v._lynch_-_unredacted_attachment_to_2004_nsl.pdf |page=3 |website=Isp.yale.edu |title=Mr. Nicholas Merrill : Attachment |access-date=June 24, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170519131858/http://isp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/page-attachments/merrill_v._lynch_-_unredacted_attachment_to_2004_nsl.pdf |archive-date=May 19, 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

=== Title VI: Victims and families of victims of terrorism ===
{{Main|Title VI of the Patriot Act}}
Title VI amended the ''[[Victims of Crime Act of 1984]]'' (VOCA) to change how the U.S. Victims of Crime Fund was managed and funded, improving the speedy provision of aid to families of public safety officers by expedited payments to officers or the families of officers injured or killed in the line of duty. Payments must be made no later than 30 days later.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, Subtitle A, Sec. 611.</ref> The Assistant Attorney General was given expanded authority under Section 614 of the USA PATRIOT Act to make grants to any organization that administers any [[Office of Justice Programs]], which includes the Public Safety Officers Benefits Program.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, Subtitle A, Sec. 614.</ref> Further changes to the Victims of Crime Fund increased the amount of money in the Fund and changed the way that funds were distributed.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, Subtitle B, Sec. 621</ref> The amount available for grants made through the Crime Victim Fund to eligible crime victim compensation programs were increased from 40 percent to 60 percent of the total in the Fund. A program can provide compensation to U.S. citizens who were adversely affected overseas. [[Means test]]ing was also waived for those who apply for compensation.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, Subtitle B, Sec. 622.</ref> Under VOCA, the director may make an annual grant from the Crime Victims Fund to support crime victim assistance programs. An amendment was made to VOCA to include offers of assistance to crime victims in [[Washington, D.C.]],  [[Puerto Rico]], the [[United States Virgin Islands|U.S. Virgin Islands]], or any other U.S. territory.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, Subtitle B, Sec. 623. Amended {{usc-clause|42|10603|(b)(1)}}</ref> VOCA also provides for compensation and assistance to victims of terrorism or mass violence.<ref>{{usc|42|10603b}}</ref> This was amended to allow the director to make supplemental grants to States for eligible crime victim compensation and assistance programs, and to victim service organizations, public agencies (including Federal, State, or local governments) and non-governmental organizations that provide assistance to victims of crime. The funds could be used to provide emergency relief, including crisis response efforts, assistance, compensation, training and technical assistance for investigations and prosecutions of terrorism.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, Subtitle B, Sec. 624.</ref>

=== Title VII: Increased information sharing for critical infrastructure protection ===
{{Main|Title VII of the Patriot Act}}
Title VII has one section. The purpose of this title is to increase the ability of U.S. law enforcement to counter terrorist activity that crosses jurisdictional boundaries. It does this by amending the [[Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968]] to include terrorism as a criminal activity.

=== Title VIII: Terrorism criminal law ===
{{Main|Title VIII of the Patriot Act}}
Title VIII alters the definitions of terrorism and establishes or re-defines rules with which to deal with it. It redefined the term "domestic terrorism" to broadly include mass destruction as well as assassination or kidnapping as a terrorist activity. The definition also encompasses activities that are "dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State" and are intended to "intimidate or coerce a civilian population," "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," or are undertaken "to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping" while in the jurisdiction of the United States.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 802.</ref>
Terrorism is also included in the definition of [[racket (crime)|racketeering]].<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 813. Amended {{usc-clause|18|1961|(1)}}</ref>
Terms relating to [[Cyberterrorism|cyber-terrorism]] are also redefined, including the term "protected computer," "damage," "conviction," "person," and "loss."<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 814. Amended {{usc-clause|18|1030|(e)}}</ref>

New penalties were created to convict those who attack [[public transport|mass transportation systems]]. If the offender committed such an attack while no passenger was on board, they are fined and imprisoned for a maximum of 20 years. However, if the activity was undertaken while the mass transportation vehicle or ferry was carrying a passenger at the time of the offense, or the offense resulted in the [[death]] of any person, then the punishment is a fine and life imprisonment.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 801.</ref>
The title amends the biological weapons statute to define the use of a biological agent, toxin, or delivery system as a weapon, other than when it is used for "[[prophylaxis|prophylactic]], protective, [[good faith|bona fide]] research, or other peaceful purposes." Penalties for anyone who cannot prove reasonably that they are using a biological agent, toxin or delivery system for these purposes are 10 years' imprisonment, a fine or both.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 817.</ref>

A number of measures were introduced in an attempt to prevent and penalize activities that are deemed to support terrorism. It was made a crime to harbor or conceal terrorists, and those who do are subject to a fine or imprisonment of up to 10 years, or both.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 803. Created {{usc|18|2339}}</ref>
U.S. [[asset forfeiture|forfeiture]] law was also amended to allow authorities to seize all foreign and domestic assets from any group or individual that is caught planning to commit acts of terrorism against the U.S. or U.S. citizens. Assets may also be seized if they have been acquired or maintained by an individual or organization for the purposes of further terrorist activities.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 806. Amends {{usc|18|981}}</ref>
One section of the Act (section 805) prohibited "material support" for terrorists, and in particular included "expert advice or assistance."<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Section 805(a)(2)(B).</ref>
In 2004, after the [[Humanitarian Law Project]] filed a civil action against the U.S. government, a Federal District Court struck this down as unconstitutionally vague;<ref name="FullRulingSection805">''[http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/terrorism/hlpash12304ord.pdf Humanitarian Law Project et al. v. John Ashcroft]'', ''Findlaw''</ref> but in 2010 the Supreme Court upheld it.<ref name=liptak>Adam Liptak, [https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/us/politics/22scotus.html?pagewanted=print Court Affirms Ban on Aiding Groups Tied to Terror], [[The New York Times]], June 21, 2010.</ref>
Congress later improved the law by defining the definitions of the "material support or resources," "training," and "expert advise or resources."<ref name="MaterialSupportRedux">Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (U.S. [[United States Senate|S.]] 2845, Public Law 108-458), Title VI, Subtitle F, Sec. 6603.</ref>

Cyberterrorism was dealt with in various ways. Penalties apply to those who either damage or gain unauthorized access to a protected computer and then commit a number of offenses. These offenses include causing a person to lose an aggregate amount greater than US$5,000, as well as adversely affecting someone's medical examination, diagnosis or treatment. It also encompasses actions that cause a person to be injured, a threat to public health or safety, or damage to a governmental computer that is used as a tool to administer justice, national defense or national security. Also prohibited was extortion undertaken via a protected computer. The penalty for attempting to damage protected computers through the use of viruses or other software mechanism was set to imprisonment for up to 10 years, while the penalty for unauthorized access and subsequent damage to a protected computer was increased to more than five years' imprisonment. However, should the offense occur a second time, the penalty increases up to 20 years' imprisonment.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 814.</ref>
The act also specified the development and support of cybersecurity forensic capabilities. It directs the Attorney General to establish regional computer forensic laboratories that have the capability of performing forensic examinations of intercepted computer evidence relating to criminal activity and cyberterrorism, and that have the capability of training and educating Federal, State, and local law enforcement personnel and prosecutors in computer crime, and to "facilitate and promote the sharing of Federal law enforcement expertise and information about the investigation, analysis, and prosecution of computer-related crime with State and local law enforcement personnel and prosecutors, including the use of multijurisdictional task forces." The sum of $50,000,000 was authorized for establishing such labs.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title VIII, Sec. 816.</ref>

=== Title IX: Improved intelligence ===
{{Main|Title IX of the Patriot Act}}
Title IX amends the ''[[National Security Act of 1947]]'' to require the [[Director of Central Intelligence]] (DCI) to establish requirements and priorities for foreign intelligence collected under FISA and to provide assistance to the U.S. Attorney General to ensure that information derived from electronic surveillance or physical searches is disseminated for efficient and effective foreign intelligence purposes.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX, Sec. 901.</ref> With the exception of information that might jeopardize an ongoing law enforcement investigation, it was made a requirement that the Attorney General, or the head of any other department or agency of the Federal Government with law enforcement responsibilities, disclose to the director any foreign intelligence acquired by the U.S. Department of Justice. The U.S. Attorney General and Director of Central Intelligence both were directed to develop procedures for the Attorney General to follow in order to inform the director, in a timely manner, of any intention of investigating criminal activity of a foreign intelligence source or potential foreign intelligence source based on the intelligence tip-off of a member of the intelligence community. The Attorney General was also directed to develop procedures on how to best administer these matters.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX, Sec. 905.</ref> International terrorist activities were made to fall within the scope of foreign intelligence under the ''National Security Act''.<ref name="Section903" />

A number of reports were commissioned relating to various intelligence-related government centers. One was commissioned into the best way of setting up the [[National Virtual Translation Center]], with the goal of developing automated translation facilities to assist with the timely and accurate translation of foreign intelligence information for elements of the U.S. intelligence community.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX, Sec. 906.</ref> The USA PATRIOT Act required this to be provided on February 1, 2002; however, the report, entitled "Director of Central Intelligence Report on the National Virtual Translation Center: A Concept Plan to Enhance the Intelligence Community's Foreign Language Capabilities, April 29, 2002" was received more than two months late, which the [[United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence|Senate Select Committee on Intelligence]] reported was "a delay which, in addition to contravening the explicit words of the statute, deprived the Committee of timely and valuable input into its efforts to craft this legislation."<ref>[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp107&sid=cp107vw7gj&refer=&r_n=sr149.107&item=&sel=TOC_56363& Senate Report 107-149] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130825010616/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp107&sid=cp107vw7gj&refer=&r_n=sr149.107&item=&sel=TOC_56363& |date=August 25, 2013 }} – "To authorize appropriations for Fiscal Year 2003 for Intelligence and Intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement Disability System, and for other purposes.", see the section "National Virtual Translation Center"</ref> Another report was commissioned on the feasibility and desirability of reconfiguring the Foreign Terrorist Asset Tracking Center and the [[Office of Foreign Assets Control]] of the [[United States Department of the Treasury|Department of the Treasury]].<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX, Sec. 907.</ref> It was due by February 1, 2002; however, it was never written. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence later complained that "[t]he Director of Central Intelligence and the Secretary of the Treasury failed to provide a report, this time in direct contravention of a section of the USA PATRIOT Act" and they further directed "that the statutorily-directed report be completed immediately, and that it should include a section describing the circumstances which led to the Director's failure to comply with lawful reporting requirements."<ref>[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp107&sid=cp107vw7gj&refer=&r_n=sr149.107&item=&sel=TOC_56363& Senate Report 107-149] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130825010616/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp107&sid=cp107vw7gj&refer=&r_n=sr149.107&item=&sel=TOC_56363& |date=August 25, 2013 }} – "To authorize appropriations for Fiscal Year 2003 for Intelligence and Intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement Disability System, and for other purposes.", see the section "Foreign Terrorist Asset Tracking Center"</ref>

Other measures allowed certain reports on intelligence and intelligence-related matters to be deferred until at least February 1, 2002, if the official involved certified that preparation and submission on February 1, 2002, would impede the work of officers or employees engaged in counterterrorism activities. Any such deferral required congressional notification before it was authorized.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX, Sec. 904.</ref> The Attorney General was charged with training officials in identifying and utilizing foreign intelligence information properly in the course of their duties. The government officials include those in the Federal Government who do not normally encounter or disseminate foreign intelligence in the performance of their duties, and State and local government officials who encounter, or potentially may encounter in the course of a terrorist event, foreign intelligence in the performance of their duties.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX, Sec. 908.</ref> A sense of Congress was expressed that officers and employees of the intelligence community should be encouraged to make every effort to establish and maintain intelligence relationships with any person, entity, or group while they conduct lawful intelligence activities.<ref name="Section903">USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX, Sec. 903.</ref>

=== Title X: Miscellaneous ===
{{Main|Title X of the Patriot Act}}

Title X created or altered a number of miscellaneous laws that did not fit into any other section of the USA PATRIOT Act. [[Dangerous goods|Hazmat]] licenses were limited to drivers who pass background checks and who can demonstrate they can handle the materials.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1012.</ref>
The [[United States Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General|Inspector General of the Department of Justice]] was directed to appoint an official to monitor, review and report back to Congress all allegations of civil rights abuses against the DoJ.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1001.</ref> It amended the definition of "electronic surveillance" to exclude the interception of communications done through or from a protected computer where the owner allows the interception, or is lawfully involved in an investigation.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1003.</ref>
Money laundering cases may now be brought in the district where the money laundering was committed or where a money laundering transfer started from.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1004.</ref>
Aliens who committed money laundering were also prohibited from entering the U.S.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1006.</ref>
Grants were provided to [[first responder]]s to assist them in responding to and preventing terrorism.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1005.</ref> US$5,000,000 was authorized to be provided to the [[Drug Enforcement Administration]] (DEA) to train police in [[South Asia|South]] and [[East Asia]].<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1007.</ref>
The Attorney General was directed to commission a study on the feasibility of using [[biometrics|biometric]] identifiers to identify people as they attempt to enter the United States, and which would be connected to the FBI's database to flag suspected criminals.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1008.</ref> Another study was also commissioned to determine the feasibility of providing [[airline]]s names of suspected terrorists before they boarded flights.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1009.</ref> The Department of Defense was given temporary authority to use their funding for private contracts for security purposes.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1010.</ref>
The last title also created a new Act called the ''Crimes Against Charitable Americans Act''<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1011 (a).</ref> which amended the ''Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act'' to require [[telemarketing|telemarketers]] who call on behalf of [[Charitable organization|charities]] to disclose the purpose and other information, including the name and mailing address of the charity the telemarketer is representing.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1011 (b).</ref>
It also increased the penalties from one year's imprisonment to five years' imprisonment for those committing fraud by impersonating a [[International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement|Red Cross]] member.<ref>USA PATRIOT Act, Title X, Sec. 1011 (c).</ref>