Arlen Specter: “The PATRIOT Act does not establish the national security letter. But the PATRIOT Act was used as a vehicle for extending…”

“The PATRIOT Act does not establish the national security letter. But the PATRIOT Act was used as a vehicle for extending civil rights, which the Senator from Idaho is concerned about. He is a civil libertarian and so am I. When he introduced the so-called SAFE Act to cut back on the PATRIOT Act, and he came to me and asked, Would you cosponsor it, I immediately said yes. But when we structured the PATRIOT Act, we took a look at the national security letters and we said, this is an occasion where we ought to rein in the national security letter. And we did so by saying the recipient did not have to keep quiet--which you have to do under existing law--but you could go to a lawyer. I don't think you ought to have to have legislative authority to go to a lawyer. But we made no bones about it. We were not going to leave that to chance, and we said you can go to a lawyer. Then that lawyer could go to court and quash the national security letter if it is unreasonable. The standard of ``reasonable'' is all over the law. It is what a reasonable person would do. It controls tort law, accidents, reasonable personal negligence, it controls antitrust law, reasonable restraints. The court has plenary authority, full authority to quash the national security letter if it is unreasonable. Now, when you come to the point about disclosure, you are dealing with some pretty tough stuff. You are dealing with national security.…”