The legal principle placing the burden of proof on accusers rather than the accused can be traced back to Second and Third Century Roman jurist, Julius Paulus Prudentissimus. Yet, this ancient concept, which forms the legal and moral cornerstone of the American judicial system, is quickly being undermined in the name of “national security.”
In August 2004, President George W. Bush created the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) via Executive Order 13354. The organization was then codified in December of that year in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA). The primary purpose of this secretive government agency is to serve as a clearinghouse for information related to terrorism, at home and abroad. Essentially, the NCTC takes data points and “connects the dots” to potential terrorist activities; all packaged in a massive database.
However, in a classic example of mission creep, over the last eight years the scope and power of the NCTC have slowly expanded. And, because this agency largely works in the shadows of the federal leviathan, neither the public nor its elected representatives in the Congress protested meaningfully.
In 2012, the operating guidelines for the NCTC were updated to include previously prohibited activities; prohibitions intelligence officials claimed had inhibited their ability to find and disseminate terror threats. For example, while the NCTC was previously required to immediately purge all records of “innocent” individuals upon discovery in the data sets being examined, the NCTC now retains this information for up to five years.
This expanded power now permits the officials at the NCTC to run dragnets of databases provided from federal, state or local sources in order to search for potential “patterns” of terrorist behavior. According to the Wall Street Journal, whose Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests unearthed much of the internal debate behind the changes to the guidelines, the chief privacy officer of the Department of Homeland Security called these new powers “a sea change in the way that the government interacts with the general public.” In a word, it is simply unconstitutional.
The change in the standards by which the NCTC now is able to troll data means every action a person takes that is logged into a government database, is subject to scrutiny for criminal behavior. Probable cause or reasonable suspicion – constitutional standards for invading a person’s privacy by government snooping -- are irrelevant in such a scenario. We are all presumed guilty of engaging in potential terrorist acts.
House Republican: If Tahmooressi Isn’t Released, Mexico Will No Longer Be Treated as our Friend | Amanda Muñoz