J u s t i c e   D





J U S T I C E   D E P A R T M E N T

A c c o m p l i s h m e n t s   i n   t h e

W a r   on   T e r r o r i s m


The Shift from Investigation to Prevention


            “When terrorism threatens our future, we cannot afford to live in the past.  We must focus on our core mission and responsibilities, understanding that the department will not be all things to all people.  We cannot do everything we once did because lives now depend on us doing a few things very well.”  -- Attorney General John Ashcroft



	Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………….……2
	Hearing the Call:
	Redefining the Justice Department’s Mission to Fight Terrorism……………………………..3
	Working Together to Investigate and Prevent:
	Immediate Steps Taken to Investigate 9/11 and Prevent Another Attack.….……..…………..7
	Information Is the Best Friend of Prevention:
	Working Together on Prevention by Sharing Information…………………………………..…12
	Arming the Troops:
	New Legal Tools for Terrorist Surveillance, Investigation and Prosecution………………..…18
		USA PATRIOT Act…………………………………………………………………………..18
		Investigative Guidelines……………………………………………………………………..26
		Attorney-Client Monitoring Regulation……………………………………………………..29
	Refocusing on Prevention:
	Reforming the Structure of the FBI to Prevent Future Attacks………………………………..30
	Keeping Our Borders Secure:
	Restructuring the Immigration and Naturalization Service…………………………………….34
	Assistance to Victims:
	Providing for the Victims and Their Families……………………………………………………39
	Averting Backlash:
Preventing Discrimination Against Arab and Muslim Communities…………………………..    40







Text Box: Executive Summary
Key Steps Taken to Shift the Justice Department from Investigation to Prevention

ü	Launched major reorganization of the Justice Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as the Immigration and Naturalization Service, to make the prevention of terrorism the first priority.

ü	Initiated the largest criminal investigation in U.S. history, which has already resulted in:
•	131 individuals charged
•	94 found guilty (through plea or a trial)
•	431 individuals deported

ü	Have established or expanded the following task forces focused on terrorism prevention, including:
•	93 Anti-Terrorism Task Forces at U.S. Attorney offices
•	Foreign Terrorism Tracking Task Force
•	56 Joint Terrorism Task Forces at FBI field offices
•	Terrorism Financing Task Force

ü	Developed the USA PATRIOT Act, which enhanced the ability of the United States to investigate and prosecute terrorism

ü	Issued six directives to increase information sharing among federal agencies, as well as with state and local law enforcement

ü	Proposed 11 new regulations targeted at terrorism prevention

ü	Issued new investigative guidelines for the FBI and other federal investigators to free field agents to better tackle the terrorist threat

ü	Established the INS absconder program to locate aliens fugitives who had been ordered deported

ü	Employed Anti-Terrorism Task Forces to conduct the 5,000 and 3,000 interview projects

ü	Increased public participation in terrorism and crime prevention

ü	Appointed Special Master to administer the Victims’ Compensation Fund

ü	Worked to prevent and prosecute backlash crimes arising out of reaction to 9/11 events, and engaged in extensive outreach to Arab-American and Muslim-American communities


Hearing the Call:

Redefining the Justice Department’s Mission to Fight Terrorism. . .



·         November 8, 2001: The Attorney General Announced a Plan to Reshape the Department and Its Components to Focus on Anti-Terrorism.  As the Attorney General said on November 8, 2001, “The attacks of September 11th have redefined the mission of the Department of Justice.  Defending our nation and defending the citizens of America against terrorist attacks is now our first and overriding priority. . . . It is a blueprint for change. It is also a call to you, the men and women of the Justice Department, to embrace fully our new mission; that we would together commit ourselves to rebuilding and remaking the department; to rededicate ourselves to the highest and most noble form of public service -- the preservation of American lives and liberty. The reforms and restructuring we must undertake in the next five years are designed, first and foremost, to sharpen the capacity of the Department of Justice to act deliberately and decisively in support of our mission.”


1)      Eliminate waste and retarget resources to fight against terrorism

2)      Refocus our resources on frontline positions

3)      Measure accountability through outcomes and results, not by inputs

4)      Attract a diverse, high-quality workforce to the department and train ourselves to be the best-trained and most talented workforce in the world

5)      Develop a seamless relationship with state and local law-enforcement agencies

6)      Update information technology to enable the sharing of intelligence and have the interoperability that a coordinated response to terrorism demands

7)      Reform the Federal Bureau of Investigation to put prevention of terrorism at the center of its law-enforcement and national-security efforts

8)      Reform the Immigration and Naturalization Service to separate the function of serving and the function of enforcing

9)      Reform the Office of Justice Programs and the grant management system to meet the new anti-terrorism mission

10)  Address the legal and cultural barriers that prevent the sharing of information and cooperation in the federal law enforcement and intelligence communities


·         Five-Year Fiscal Strategy Developed.  The new reorganization plan -- Reorganization and Mobilization of the Nation's Justice and Law Enforcement Resources – contains DOJ’s strategy for fiscal years 2001 to 2006 to help meet the new anti‑terrorism mission.  This was completed almost two years ahead of time and preventing terrorism is identified as the Department’s top priority.


·         Refocusing Financial Resources to Counter the Threat of Terrorism:  The Justice Department budget to fight terrorism has increased 226% from 2001 to 2003, and the budget for the FBI has increased 32% during that timeframe.  Prior to the terrorist attacks, in a September 10th preliminary discussion draft budget, the Justice Department recommended a budget of $3.8 billion for the FBI, and sought an overall $660 million increase in the Department for items that assist in combating terrorism.  This $660 million included money for such items as FBI technology to improve information and intelligence analysis -- which was their top priority -- as well as national infrastructure protection and airport inspections.  After September 11th, the counterterrorism budget for the Justice Department was significantly increased by an additional $2 billion.


      Immediate Response.   Within days of the attacks, DOJ and Congress worked together to promptly allocate $40 million from DOJ’s Counterterrorism Fund.  This quick action ensured that DOJ components had sufficient resources in the closing days of FY 2001 to respond appropriately to the unfolding events without worrying about available funding.  Most of this immediate funding went to the FBI for emergency investigative costs.


      Supplemental Funding.  Following closely on the heels of the immediate response, Congress enacted a $40 billion counterterrorism-focused supplemental appropriation.  DOJ worked with its components and the Administration to identify critical additional funding needed both to respond to the attacks and to mitigate and prevent future such incidents.  Many DOJ programs benefited from this supplemental funding—over $2.2 billion of the supplemental resources went to DOJ.  Not only did this fund ongoing emergency investigative costs that will continue into FY 2003, but it also provided funding for new and expanded programs that will help DOJ prevent future incidents.  In July, Congress passed a second counterterrorism supplemental.  In this supplemental, the Department received an additional $51 million.


      Highlights of supplemental funding provided by Congress are:


-          Federal Bureau of Investigation received 823 positions and $784.7 million in the first supplemental, in addition to the $36.9 million provided from the Counterterrorism Fund for immediate needs, and another $10 million in the second supplemental.  The first supplemental provided funding for the extraordinary operational costs of the investigation, equipment, and supplies, Trilogy implementation, Information Assurance, and National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) support.  The $10 million in the second supplemental was for the operations of the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force.


-          Immigration and Naturalization Service received 1,046 positions and $583 million in the first supplemental, and other $35 million in the second supplemental.  Among the key increases in the first supplemental are:  $296 million related to contracts for technical systems improvements and design; $80 million for Border Security enhancements; $108 million associated with personnel compensation for newly authorized positions, such as Border Patrol Agents and Immigration Inspectors; and $99.6 million for construction projects.  In the second supplemental, INS received funding for airport inspections, pay upgrades for border patrol agents and inspectors, as well as absconder apprehension and removal.


-          United States Attorneys received 468 positions and $56,370,000, most of which is supporting the new Anti-Terrorism Task Forces.  This funding will support additional personnel, including assistant United States attorneys and intelligence research specialists.  In addition, $9.3 million is being used for direct financial support of the Task Forces’ state and local participants, to offset equipment, training and related costs.


-          Office of Justice Programs received $719.2 million.   The $719.2 million was appropriated as follows:  $400,000,000 for the Office of Domestic Preparedness (ODP) to enhance the preparedness and response capabilities of State and local entities with responsibility for responding to terrorist attacks, including within this amount is $9,800,000 for an aircraft for New York City, and $20,000,000 for a Capital Wireless Integrated Network in the Washington Metropolitan area; $251,100,000 for Byrne Discretionary grants under the State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Programs for allocation to State and local public safety entities for expenses for emergency preparedness equipment, training, and other public safety purposes in their jurisdictions; and $68,100,000 for the Office of Victims of Crime for grants to counseling programs for the victims of the September 11th terrorist attacks, as well as their families and crisis responders.


-          United States Marshals Service received $19.3 million in the supplemental, in addition to the $3.9 million provided in the immediate response funding.  Of the $19.3 million in the supplemental: $4 million is provided for additional protection of the federal judiciary in New York City involved in the World Trade Center and the Embassy bombing trials; $1.2 million for Foley Square and Brooklyn Federal Courthouse security expenses; $5 million for courthouse security equipment; and $9.1 million for USMS Construction.  Within the total funding available, the USMS is expected to provide up to $200,000 for additional security needs at the Federal Courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia.


-          The Civil Division received 20 positions and $15,000,000 for the administration of the September 11 Victim Compensation Program.  The funds will be used to pay the salaries of new employees needed to administer the program, as well as contractual services needed to process and adjudicate claims, administer several walk-in victim compensation centers, conduct outreach and mass mailings to victims, and maintain a website and help line to assist claimants.


-          Funding the Response to Victims: as noted above, the $2.2 billion made available for DOJ programs included some funding for victims’ assistance, including the $15 million for the Civil Division.  Separate from this funding, Congress enacted additional permanent indefinite appropriations to fund the costs of the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Program and the September 11th Victims’ Compensation Fund.  These indefinite appropriations mean that such sums as necessary to pay claims are available.


-          Other Additional Supplemental Funding Highlights: for the Criminal Division, 48 positions and $4.8 million from the first supplemental, and $5.75 million for the Justice Management Division for the identification of potential terrorists at ports-of- entry.


ü  Longer Term Response.  As part of the overall retargeting of resources, DOJ’s FY 2003 budget request seeks significant additional resources for our federal counterterrorism efforts.  DOJ’s direct funding to State and local law enforcement is proposed for reduction, but this reduction is more than offset by new grant programs in FEMA.  The redirection of grant funding to FEMA frees up funding for direct DOJ efforts.  The FY 2003 budget includes $1.5 billion in new or expanded counterterrorism programs, and another $539 million to continue ongoing efforts initiated with the funding provided in the supplemental.


ü  Retargeting Resources.   DOJ will meet longer-term funding needs in a couple of ways.  First, included in the Attorney General’s November 8, 2001, announcement was the goal to retarget resources to counterterrorism.  This is evidenced in the President’s FY 2003 budget proposal.  In FY 2001, under 5% of DOJ’s discretionary appropriation was aimed at counterterrorism.  September 11 changed the way in which DOJ views its efforts to combat and prevent terrorism, such as magnifying the importance of border security.  In FY 2003 President’s Budget, about 13% of DOJ’s discretionary appropriations would be used for efforts to improve counterterrorism programs.  While this percentage increase is, in part, due to new spending requests, it also reflects the ongoing effort to retarget resources to counterterrorism.  A primary example of this redirection is the FBI reorganization.  Key highlights of the new and expanded programs proposed in the FY 2003 budget include:


-          FBI: $412 million in additional funds as follows:  $223 million to increase intelligence and surveillance capabilities, response capabilities, and additional equipment and support personnel; $109 million to enhance various FBI information technology projects, including digital storage of documents, data management and warehousing, collaborative capabilities, IT support for Legal Attaches, continuity of operations, video teleconferencing capabilities, and Trilogy support and mainframe data center upgrades; and $78 million to harden FBI information systems against inappropriate and illegal use and intrusion, and to conduct background investigations. The total proposed FY 2003 budget for the FBI ($4.3 billion) is a 19% increase over FY 2002 ($3.6 billion pre-CT Supplemental).  With these increases, the FBI budget has increased by almost one-third over the past two years (29%).


-          INS:  $734 million in additional funds to improve Border Security.  Border Security funding increases consist of:  Entry/Exit System, $362 million, to fund a multi-year effort to provide a comprehensive land, sea, and air entry/exit system for the United States; and Border Enforcement, $372 million and 570 positions (570 agents), which includes $76.3 million to hire, train, and deploy an additional 570 Border Patrol agents.  This increase in Border Patrol fulfills the President’s commitment to increase the Patrol to over 11,000 agents as authorized in 1996.



Working Together to Investigate and Prevent:

Immediate Steps Taken to Investigate 9/11 and Prevent Another Attack. . .


·         Dedicating the Full Force to the Job of Investigation and Prosecution:


ü  The Largest Criminal Investigation in U.S. History.  On September 11, 2001, the Justice Department immediately began what has become the largest criminal investigation in U.S. history. The FBI created a national task force to centralize control and information sharing resulting in hundreds of thousands of leads, hundreds of searches, thousands of interviews of witnesses, and numerous court-authorized surveillance orders.


ü  To Provide the Resources Necessary to Address the September 11th Investigation, Approximately 7,000 FBI Employees Were Redirected in Early Weeks.  At its peak, approximately 6,000 Special Agents were working on the investigation with assistance from support staff.  Additional resources were dedicated to the related threats and tragedies such as the anthrax investigation, Olympics security, the Richard Reid investigation, and the Daniel Pearl kidnapping.


ü  The Criminal Investigation Is Yielding Results: 131 individuals have been criminally charged in September 11th-related matters, 94 have already been found guilty after plea or a trial, and 31 cases are currently pending.  Three of the high profile criminal cases include:


-          Zacarias Moussaoui was indicted in December 2001 on six counts of conspiracy connected with the September 11 attacks, including: 1) conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism; 2) conspiracy to commit aircraft piracy; 3) conspiracy to destroy aircraft; 4) conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction; 5) conspiracy to murder United States employees; and 6) conspiracy to destroy property.  The indictment alleges that Moussaoui trained with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan in April 1998, and also traces funds he received from sources in Germany and the Middle East.  On March 28, 2002, the Government filed notice that it would seek the death penalty against Moussaoui.  Trial is scheduled for January 2003.


-          John Walker Lindh, the American citizen who joined the Taliban and was captured by military forces in Afghanistan, was charged on February 5, 2002, with 10 counts including: conspiracy to murder U.S. citizens or U.S. nationals; two counts of conspiracy to provide material support and resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations; two counts of providing material support and resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations; two counts of providing material support and resources to terrorist organizations; and one count of supplying services to the Taliban.  Lindh pleaded guilty to several charges carrying a combined penalty of 20 years.


-          Richard Reid was arrested in Boston after he tried to light a shoe bomb while on American Airlines Flight 63, which was en route from Paris to Miami.  A federal grand jury in Massachusetts returned a nine-count indictment on January 16, 2002, charging Reid as an Al Qaeda-trained terrorist who attempted to destroy American Airline Flight 63 with explosives.  Trial is scheduled for November 2002.



ü  The Investigation Is Disrupting and Punishing Other Criminal Activities, for example:


-          Alleged Conspiracy to Provide Support to Terrorists.  On August 28, 2002, a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Michigan returned an indictment against four individuals, charging them with conspiracy to provide material support or resources to terrorists; conspiracy to engage in fraud and misuse of visas, permits and other documents; fraud and misuse of visas, permits and other documents; and fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents and information. The indictment of Karim Koubriti, Ahmed Hannan, Farouk Ali-Haimoud and a fugitive whose last name is unknown alleges that the defendants conspired to provide services to individuals in the United States and abroad in order to assist them in engaging and promoting violent attacks in Jordan, Turkey and the United States.


-          Alleged Conspiracy to Provide Support to Al Qaeda.  On August 28, 2002, a federal grand jury in the Western District of Washington returned an indictment against Earnest James Ujaama, charging him with conspiracy to provide material support and resources to terrorists, and using, carrying, possessing and discharging firearms during a crime of violence. The indictment alleges that Ujaama entered into a conspiracy with others to provide material support and resources to Al Qaeda, and proposed to co-conspirators the creation of a violent jihad training camp in Oregon.


-          Visa Fraud Scheme.  On June 24, 2002, in the District of Maryland, Jordanian national Rasmi Subhi Saleh Al Shannaq was arrested by the INS and other agents attached to the Maryland Joint Terrorism Task Force.  Al Shannaq has admitted to residing with September 11 hijackers Nawaf Al Hazmi and Hani Hanjour.  Al Shannaq’s arrest led to the discovery of a large visa fraud scheme. Of the known fraudulent visa recipients, 40 have been arrested, 19 are being sought and 10 are presumed to have departed.


-          Identification and Immigration Fraud.  In December 2001, in the Eastern District of Virginia, Luis Martinez-Flores pled guilty to fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1028.  Martinez-Flores helped hijackers Hanjour and Midhar get Virginia identification documents on August 1, 2001.  During his appearance he also admitted to violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1546 (immigration fraud) and to having exaggerated his connection to the hijackers.  He had falsely told the FBI that Hanjour had discussed attacks on Federal Reserve banks, stadiums and other large buildings on the East Coast.


-          Identification Fraud.  On February 1, 2002, in the Eastern District of Virginia, Victor Lopez-Flores was sentenced to 27 months incarceration, 3 years supervised release, a $100 special assessment and immediate deportation after his incarceration period.  Victor Lopez-Flores helped hijackers Abdul Aziz Alomari and Ahmed Saleh Alghamdi get Virginia identification documents on August 2, 2001.  Previously, in December 2001, in the Eastern District of Virginia, Herbert Villalobos pled guilty to fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1028, for helping hijackers Alomari and Alghamdi get false identification documents in Virginia.


-          Alleged Smuggling of Aliens.  On February 21, 2002, in the District of Columbia, Maher Jarad was indicted by a grand jury after an investigation by the INS, the Alien Smuggling Task Force, and the USAO-DC.  Jarad is a long-time target, alleged to be one of the most prominent smugglers of Middle Eastern aliens.  The indictment follows the Coast Guard’s interdiction in international waters of a ship carrying numerous illegal immigrants from Ecuador.  Jarad was expelled by Ecuador to the United States.



ü  Deployed Agents to Airports, and Initiated Law Enforcement Crackdowns on Fraudulent Documentation of Those Working at Airports.  The Departments of Justice and Treasury deployed hundreds of agents of the U.S. Marshals Service, U.S. Border Patrol, and U.S. Customs as part of a broad effort by federal law enforcement authorities to provide a larger police presence at airports, in addition to the heightened security procedures put into effect.  Law enforcement operations included:


-          Charlotte Airport:  In March 2002, in Charlotte, North Carolina, Operation “Access Denied” focused on undocumented aliens who obtained employment using counterfeit documents and then obtained security badges for the Charlotte Douglas International Airport.  120 companies, who issued 8,560 security badges, were reviewed.  It was determined that approximately 87 individuals obtained security badges using false documentation, of whom 86 were illegal aliens -- 67 still worked at the airport with security access.  Accordingly, on March 4, 2002, the grand jury returned 67 indictments charging identification document fraud.


-          Dulles and Reagan National Airports: On April 23, 2002, federal authorities arrested 94 workers at Dulles International Airport and Reagan National Airport on charges of fraudulently obtaining airport security badges.  The badges allow the individuals to enter secure areas where planes are loaded.  The charges against the 94 workers include falsifying Social Security applications and violating immigration laws.


ü  The INS Worked to Identify Individuals from Al Qaeda Countries Here Illegally and Tighten Law Enforcement Presence at Borders.  Working cooperatively with the FBI and other participants in Joint Terrorism Task Forces, INS special agents have pursued thousands of leads in the September 11th attacks, resulting in the arrest of over 500 aliens, many from countries with a significant al Qaeda presence, for a variety of administrative and criminal offenses.  The INS also took steps to tighten security at borders, and provide information to airlines that would assist in preventing the entry of potential terrorists.  Of the cases INS has designated as "special interest" (i.e. part of the 9-11 investigation), 431 individuals have been deported.  Currently, the number of individuals currently being held in custody by the INS on immigration-related charges, brought in connection with the 9/11 investigation, is 52.  The total number of individuals detained over the past year by INS on immigration violations brought in connection with the 9/11 investigation is over 700.


ü  Over 14,900 Anthrax Reports Investigated.  The FBI, U.S. Attorneys, and the Justice Department have responded to more than 14,900 reports of used or threatened use of anthrax. Law enforcement has worked to investigate the 22 anthrax cases and hoaxes. At least 55 complaints and/or indictments have been obtained for the Anthrax hoaxes so far, and a $2.5 million reward is being offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the individual(s) responsible for mailing the four anthrax letters that caused the first anthrax fatalities in the United States in many years.


ü  List of 22 Most Wanted Terrorists Announced.  On October 10, 2001, the Justice Department announced a list of the 22 “most wanted terrorists” being sought by the United States.


ü  Terrorist Organizations Announced.  At the Attorney General’s request, the State Department designated 39 entities as terrorist organizations last fall.  As a result, individuals associated with those organizations are ineligible to enter the United States.  The Attorney General recently requested the State Department to designate an additional 9 groups as terrorist organizations.


ü  Freezing Financial Assets of 62 Organizations that Support Terrorism.  The Treasury Department and the Department of Justice collaborated to freeze the assets and accounts of 62 individuals and organizations connected with two terrorist-supporting financial networks, the al-Taqua and the al-Barakaat, and one organization funneling money to Hamas.


-          The Passage of the USA PATRIOT Act Provided New Tools to Cut Off Funding for International Terrorists.  International Money Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act, Title III):  The Act’s money-laundering portions are designed to neutralize the sources of terrorist organizations’ funding.  It encourages financial institutions to share information about transactions involving suspected terrorists, requires certain companies to report on large cash transactions, and authorizes the forfeiture of terrorists’ assets.


-          INS Has Arrested Noncitizens Who May Be Involved in Terrorism Fundraising.  INS special agents worked with agents and attorneys from the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to identify and freeze the assets of terrorist organizations and their fronts.  Working with OFAC and Customs, INS also identified and arrested aliens involved in these fronts as board members or directors who are amenable to removal from the United States.


ü  The Terrorism Financing Task Force.  The Terrorism Financing Task Force works with prosecutors around the country, using financial investigative tools to aggressively disrupt groups and individuals that represent terrorist threats.


ü  Interviewing Those Who Could Help.  The Attorney General directed all United States Attorneys and members of the joint federal and state Anti-Terrorism Task Forces to conduct voluntary interviews of certain non-citizens in their jurisdictions.


-          The 5,000 Interviews Were Highly Successful and Yielded Helpful Information: The first round of voluntary interviews were of 5,000 individuals compiled using common-sense criteria that take account of the manner in which al Qaeda traditionally has operated.  For example, the list included individuals (1) who entered the United States with a passport from a foreign country in which al Qaeda has operated or recruited; (2) who entered the United States after January 1, 2000; and (3) who are males between the ages of 18 and 33.


-          A Second Phase of 3,000 Interviews Was Launched After the First Round Provided Useful Information.  Following the success of the first round of interviews, and the helpfulness of the individuals who were contacted, the Attorney General asked the Anti-Terrorism Task Forces to conduct a second round of interviews using slightly enlarged criteria.


ü  Tightened Security at Olympics and the Super Bowl.  Provided the Olympics and the Super Bowl with security designations that enabled them to have security protection by the Federal government. The Olympics had an unprecedented security operation that integrated federal, state and local law enforcement to protect the thousands of athletes and spectators at the Salt Lake City Olympics.


ü  Training Provided by ODP to Local Emergency First Responders.  The Office for Domestic Preparedness has provided training to emergency responders, including over 34,000 personnel in Fiscal Year 2001, and more than 21,000 to date in FY 2002.


ü  State and Local Anti-Terrorism Training  (SLATT) Program Has Provided Assistance to Law Enforcement Authorities.  The State and Local Anti-Terrorism Training (SLATT) Program, administered by OJP’s Bureau of Justice Assistance, provides training and technical assistance on pre-incident preparation and preparedness to state and local law enforcement administrators and prosecution authorities.  SLATT works in close cooperation with the FBI’s National Security Division Training Unit, delivering specialized executive, investigative, intelligence, and officer safety training.


ü  Equipment Grants to Provide Resources to Our Nation’s Emergency First Responders.  In the FY 2001 appropriations act, Congress required states to develop and submit statewide domestic preparedness strategies in order to receive funding under ODP’s State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program.  To expedite the award of these equipment funds to the states, the Attorney General sent a letter on September 21, 2001 urging all governors to complete development of the congressionally-required statewide domestic preparedness strategies.  As of June 14, 2002,  ODP has received 51 of 56 strategies, and 42 applications for equipment funding.  ODP has provided more than $90 million of equipment funds under the Fiscal Year 2001 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program.


ü  ODP Funds Provided through the FY 2002 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act.  The Office for Domestic Preparedness provided New York City $9.8 million to purchase a specialized helicopter to respond to a variety of emergency situations, including terrorist attacks.



·         Defending the President’s Commander-in-Chief Powers and the Actions Taken by the Executive Branch to Prevent Future Attacks in the War on Terrorism.  In litigation related to the war on terrorism or terrorism prevention, the Justice Department has defended the government’s actions in cases including:


ü  Guantanamo Bay Detainee Cases

ü  Hamdi v. Rumsfeld

ü  Padilla v. Bush

ü  North Jersey Media Group v. Ashcroft

ü  ACLU of New Jersey v. Hudson and Passaic Counties

ü  Center for National Security Studies v. Department of Justice

ü  Global Relief Foundation v. O’Neill

ü  Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development v. Ashcroft


Information Is the Best Friend of Prevention. . .

Working Together on Prevention by Sharing Information


·         New Legal Authority to Share Information:


ü  The USA PATRIOT Act Increased the Ability of Law Enforcement to Share Information for Critical Infrastructure Protection:


-          Establishes Secure Information-Sharing Systems to Enhance the Ability of Agencies to Investigate or Prosecute Multi-Jurisdiction Terrorist Activities.  (USA PATRIOT Act, Title VII)


-          Allows Law-Enforcement Personnel to Share Grand-Jury and Wiretap Information Regarding Foreign Intelligence with Various Other Federal Officers Without First Obtaining a Court Order: including law-enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national-defense, and national-security personnel.  Previous law sharply limited the ability of law-enforcement personnel to share investigative information, and hampered terrorism investigations.  Section 203 establishes a general rule that, notwithstanding any other provision of law, federal law-enforcement personnel may share foreign-intelligence information with intelligence, protective, immigration, national-defense, and national-security personnel.  (USA PATRIOT Act, Title II, Section 203: Authority to Share Criminal Investigative Information)


·         Initiatives and Groups Created to Share Investigation and Prevention Information:


ü  An Expanded Alert System.  The FBI expanded the terrorist threat warning system that now reaches all aspects of the law enforcement and intelligence communities.  Around 18,000 state and local law enforcement offices receive warning and threat information through this system, as well as 60 federal agencies and their subcomponents.


-          Since September 11th, the FBI Has Issued Over 60 Warnings of Potential Terrorist Threats or Vulnerabilities, as Well as 3 Major Public Notification Alerts Raising Awareness of an Increased Risk of Attack.


-          Assisted with the Creation of a New 5-Level Homeland Security Alert System Using Color-Coding.  Since the announcement of this new system on March 12, 2002, the country has been on an elevated “yellow” alert, indicating a significant risk of terrorist attack.


ü  Unprecedented International Investigative Cooperation.  Recognizing that the United States cannot eliminate international terrorism working alone, the Justice Department and other federal agencies worked collaboratively with our partners overseas to gather and share information about terrorist networks overseas and their activities in an unprecedented fashion.


-          Convictions Reached in Daniel Pearl Murder.  On July 15, 2002, in Hyderabad, Pakistan, four defendants, including Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, were convicted for the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl.  In addition, the defendants were found guilty of kidnaping, conspiracy to kidnap and tampering with evidence.  Sheik was sentenced to death and the remaining perpetrators were sentenced to life in prison.


-          More than 50 Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty and Evidence Requests.  In addition to innumerable informal exchanges between the FBI and their counterparts overseas, the Department has made more than 50 mutual legal assistance treaty requests and other formal requests for evidence to 18 countries, and, in turn has received and is acting upon more than 20 such requests from 8 foreign countries.


ü  Established 56 Joint Terrorism Task Forces to Enhance Field Capacity to Detect and Disrupt Terrorism.  To enhance the FBI’s ability to promote coordinated terrorism investigations among FBI field offices and with their counterparts in federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, 56 Joint Terrorism Task Forces were created across the nation, one in each FBI field office.


ü  Created 93 Anti-Terrorism Task Forces.  To integrate and further coordinate anti-terrorism activities in the field, the Justice Department created 93 Anti-Terrorism Task Forces (ATTF’s) -- one in each U.S. Attorney's district -- to integrate the communications and activities of local, state and federal law enforcement.  The ATTFs include a 24/7 contact system to ensure that key members of the ATTFs and other agencies can quickly communicate and respond to any future terrorist acts.


ü  Created the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force.  The Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force was established to better ensure that federal agencies, including the FBI, INS, Customs Service and others, coordinate their efforts to bar from the United States all aliens who meet any of the following criteria: aliens who are representatives, members or supporters of terrorist organizations; aliens who are suspected of engaging in terrorist activity; or aliens who provide material support to terrorist activity.


ü  Instituted the National Security Coordination Council of the Department of Justice.  The Attorney General created the National Security Coordination Council with the principal mission of ensuring a more seamless coordination of all functions of the department relating to national security, particularly our efforts to combat terrorism.  Headed by the Deputy Attorney General, the Director of the FBI and other department officials are included in membership.


ü  Provided Training to Law Enforcement Officers in the Field.  The Justice Department and the FBI provided national training for approximately 25,000 state and local law enforcement officers on the detection, prevention, and response to terrorist acts.


ü  Provided Over $600 Million to Local Governments, Allowing Them to Purchase Equipment to Respond to Terrorist Attacks.  The Office of Domestic Preparedness has made more than $607 million available for the procurement of equipment for responding to attacks using weapons of mass destruction.  Specialized equipment has been delivered to major cities such as New York City and Washington, D.C., as well as to other potentially targeted cities such as New Orleans, home to the Super Bowl, and Salt Lake City, host of the 2002 Winter Olympics.


ü  Working Together on a Comprehensive Review of Border Management.  Since September 11th, the Justice Department used consolidated law enforcement assets of FBI, INS and U.S. Attorneys to prevent and disrupt possible terrorism networks.  The INS and Customs have worked together to increase cooperation in border enforcement.



·         Including the Public in Prevention:


ü  Pictures of Terrorists Released to Public.  The Justice Department released to the public pictures of suspected terrorists who made “martyr” videotapes vowing to harm Americans.  These pictures and videotape were widely disseminated in the news and on the Justice Department and FBI websites in early 2002.


ü  Reward for Information Leading to Capture of bin Laden.  The U.S. government offered a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to the apprehension or conviction of Osama bin Laden.


ü  Encouraged Citizens to Join Law Enforcement in Being Vigilant and Watchful for Suspicious Activity.


-          A Website and Toll Free Number for Citizens.  In the fall, the FBI established a website and a toll free 800 number for people to report any information about possible terrorist crimes.  The phone tip line received over 180,000 calls in less than two months, which generated nearly 30,000 leads.  The website generated over 225,000 tips.


-          Kicked Off the National Neighborhood Watch Effort in Spring 2002 to Double Neighborhood Watch Programs and to Incorporate Terrorism Prevention into the Mission of Neighborhood Watch.  With a goal to double the number of neighborhood watch programs from 7,500 to 15,000, on March 6, 2002 the Attorney General promoted membership in neighborhood watch and encouraged citizens to do their part in their communities.  The National Sheriff’s Association received a DOJ grant of $1.9 million to assist communities in this expansion and the Ad Council provided Public Service Announcements to promote involvement in Neighborhood Watch.


-          The Responsible Cooperators Program.  The Justice Department will provide immigration benefits to non-citizens who furnish information to help apprehend terrorists or to stop terrorist attacks.  Specifically, aliens who come forward with valuable information may receive “S visas” (or deferred action status) that will allow them to remain in the United States for a period of time. Aliens who are granted “S visas” may later apply to become permanent residents and, ultimately, American citizens.



·         The Attorney General Issued Six Directives to Increase Information-Sharing:


ü  September 21, 2001, Attorney General Directive to Make Available Information on Credible Threats to Federal, State or Local Officials:  Directed the heads of every Department component to make available at the earliest possible moment information that was deemed to expose a credible threat to the life or safety of any individual or which might otherwise enhance public safety, to the appropriate federal, state, and local officials in order to increase the possibility that any threatened action could be disrupted.


ü  November 8, 2001, Attorney General Directive Articulating Goals and Initiatives to Further Disrupt Terrorist Plans: Issued to the heads of every Department component, the directive articulated a number of Department goals and management initiatives to share information and further advance the mission of the Department to: disrupt, weaken, and eliminate terrorist networks; prevent or thwart terrorist attacks; and bring to justice the perpetrators of terrorist acts.


ü  November 8, 2001, Attorney General Directive to Review Component Information and Make It Available Consistent with the New Law Enforcement Tools in the USA PATRIOT Act:  Directed the head of each component to review any information under the component’s control and to make determinations on sharing such information, in accordance with the new information sharing authorities under the USA PATRIOT Act, with appropriate law enforcement and national security personnel; to assess the intelligence capabilities of the component and make improvements where necessary; and directing every component to coordinate its efforts with other Department components and outside agencies at the federal, state, and local level to improve the Department’s responses to potential leads and information that could lead to the early detection of possible terrorist activity.


ü  November 13, 2001, Attorney General Directive to Designate an Official to Share Information Regarding Terrorist Investigations with State and Local Law Enforcement Officials:  Directed each U.S. Attorney to designate a Chief Information Officer (CIO) in order to centralize the process by which information relevant to the investigation and prosecution of terrorists can be shared with state and local officials.  In addition, directed each CIO of the district to solicit suggestions from state and local officials on the best way to disseminate information in the district and to establish communications protocols for information sharing.


ü  November 13, 2001, Attorney General Directive to Makes Counterterrorism Training Available to Local Law Enforcement Participants in the Anti-Terrorism Task Forces:  Issued to the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs, the Directors of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, and all United States Attorneys.  This directive required training similar to that of the Anti-Terrorism Coordinators be made available to local law enforcement participants in the ATTFs either at the National Advocacy Training Center in Columbia, South Carolina, or through remote training at the 94 United States Attorneys’ offices.


ü  April 11, 2002, Attorney General Directive to Institutionalize Information Sharing Efforts Through Shared Databases:  Issued to the Deputy Attorney General, the Assistant Attorneys General for the Criminal Division and the Office of Legal Policy, the Commissioner of INS, the Administrator of the DEA, and the Directors of the FBI, the Executive Office of United States Attorneys, the Marshals Service, and the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force.  The directives included expanding terrorist information in law enforcement databases, coordinating foreign terrorist information with the Department of Defense and foreign law enforcement agencies, improving information coordination with state and local partners through the development of a secure but unclassified web-based system, and the standardizing of the procedures for the sharing of foreign intelligence and counterintelligence information obtained as part of a criminal investigation with relevant federal officials.



     These Six Information-Sharing Directives Have Produced Results:


ü  The FBI Provides Information on a Daily Basis to Terrorism Task Forces Nationwide as well as to the CIA and Defense Department.  Through the establishment of thirty-six Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), and its Regional Terrorism Task Forces (RTTFs), the FBI is providing information on a daily basis both to other federal agencies and to their state and local counterparts.  In addition, the FBI is providing daily briefings to both the CIA and the Department of Defense to update and share reports on their ongoing investigations.


ü  The FBI’s New Office of Intelligence Reports to the Head of the Counterintelligence and Counterterrorism Groups.  The FBI has created a new Office of Intelligence that reports directly to the Executive Assistant Director for Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence.


ü  A New Program to Train FBI Analysts.  The Department has created a new training program, the College of Analytical Studies.  FBI analysts will undergo a four-week residential training program and recruitment of individuals for analyst positions.  In addition, the FBI has actively increased its recruitment of individuals to fill these analyst positions.


ü  INS and the State Department Have Deployed a Consolidated Database with Shared Information.  Working with the State Department, INS deployed a Consolidated Consular Database that includes visa information and photographs for aliens seeking entry into the U.S.  The database will aid inspection agents in determining if an alien is engaged in fraudulent conduct or is otherwise making a valid and legal application for admission.


ü  Cross-Agency Units Are Working with the INS on Border Enforcement and Maritime Enforcement.  The INS has expanded Integrated Border Enforcement Teams and Integrated Maritime Enforcement Teams, cross-agency, multi-national units designed to share intelligence and technology as well as coordinate enforcement of American borders.


ü  Airlines and the INS Are Working Together in Passenger Analysis.  The INS has expanded its Passenger Analysis Units at key airports and seaports.  Utilizing data provided by airlines through the Advance Passenger Information System, the INS is able to scrutinize information on U.S.-bound passengers prior to their arrival.


ü  Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies Are Using New Technology to Exchange Information Coordinated by the National Drug Intelligence Center.  The National Drug Intelligence Center is employing technologies, such as its Document and Computer Exploitation Program, which allows federal, state, and local agencies, using a software application called a Real-time Analytical Intelligence Database (RAID), to quickly exchange information and compare commonalities among cases.


ü  The DEA’s Office of International Intelligence Has Developed an Intelligence Response Team to Assist in Global Debriefings, as well as Intelligence Collection and Analysis.


ü  A New Watch Desk Has Been Created at DEA’s Intelligence Center to Exchange Information with the FBI.  The DEA established a Special Watch Desk at its intelligence center whereby informational queries are now passed directly from FBI headquarters to the Watch Desk with responses provided in approximately one hour.



Arming the Troops:

New Legal Tools for Terrorism Surveillance, Investigation and Prosecution…


“Today, we take an essential step in defeating terrorism, while protecting the constitutional rights of all Americans.  With my signature, this law will give intelligence and law enforcement officials important new tools to fight a present danger.”  The bill provides law enforcement officials with new resources in the areas of criminal procedure, intelligence gathering, and immigration violations.  --  President George W. Bush, signing the USA Patriot Act, October 26, 2001



     USA Patriot Act: Following September 11th, the Justice Department swiftly developed a legislative package to provide the law enforcement community with the tools and resources necessary to disrupt, weaken, thwart and eliminate the infrastructure of terrorist organizations, to prevent or thwart terrorist attacks, and to punish perpetrators of terrorist acts.   The bill provides law enforcement officials with new resources in the areas of criminal procedure, intelligence gathering, and immigration violations.  Some of the provisions include:


ü  Enhancing Domestic Security Against Terrorism (USA PATRIOT Act, Title I):


-          Reimburses the costs to federal agencies of detaining individuals in foreign countries accused of terrorist acts, as well as the costs to the Justice Department components to rebuild facilities and prosecute terrorism. (Section 101: Counterterrorism Fund)


-          Funds the FBI’s Technical Support Center, which was designed to help combat terrorism and to enhance the FBI’s tactical operations.  (Section 103: Increased Funding for the Technical Support Center at the FBI)


-          Enables Attorney General to seek assistance from the Defense Department in case of an attack with a weapon of mass destruction.  Section 104 enables the Attorney General to seek the Defense Department’s assistance if a weapon of mass destruction was used in the United States.  (Section 104: Requests for Military Assistance to Enforce Prohibition in Certain Emergencies)


-          National network of electronic crime task forces.  Section 105 instructs the Secret Service to develop a national network of electronic crime task forces, to help prevent and investigate various electronic crimes.  (Section 105: Expansion of National Electronic Crime Task Force Initiative)


-          Restores Presidential authority to confiscate property during hostilities, and enhances authority to retaliate against terrorists using unconventional warfare.  Previous law permitted the President to seize the assets of hostile foreign entities only when the United States is at “war.”  But because Congress has not formally declared war on those responsible for September 11th, the President lacks the ability to take crippling economic actions against our enemies.  Although the President had this authority for much of the 20th century under the Trading With the Enemies Act, it was eliminated when the International Economic Emergency Act was passed in 1977.  The Act restored to the President, only in the limited circumstances when the United States has been attacked or is engaged in military hostilities, the power to confiscate and take title to enemies’ property.  It also enhances his ability to retaliate against terrorists where Congress has not formally declared war against a foreign nation.  (Section 106: Presidential Authority)


-          Allows courts to consider classified evidence without making it public.  Section 106 authorizes courts to consider classified evidence, without making it public, in lawsuits that challenge the government’s seizure of property.  (Section 106: Presidential Authority)



ü  Enhanced Terrorist Surveillance Procedures (USA PATRIOT Act, Title II):


-          Adds terrorism crimes to the list of offenses for which wiretap orders are available, also makes wiretap orders available to investigate computer fraud.  The wiretap statute authorizes the government to seek a court order to intercept communications relating to a list of enumerated crimes.  Previously that list did not include a number of offenses that terrorists are likely to commit.  The offenses added under Section 201 include chemical weapons offenses, killing United States nationals abroad, using weapons of mass destruction, and providing material support to terrorist organizations.  Section 202 expands the availability of wiretaps to include communications that could reveal evidence of felonious computer fraud.  This provision enables law-enforcement personnel to gather information about attacks on computer systems, which sophisticated international terrorist organizations are capable of planning.  (Section 201 and 202: Authority to Intercept Wire, Oral, and Electronic Communications Relating to Terrorism)


-          Allows law-enforcement personnel to share grand-jury and wiretap information regarding foreign intelligence with various other federal officers without first obtaining a court order, including law-enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national-defense, and national-security personnel.  Previous law sharply limited the ability of law-enforcement personnel to share investigative information, and hampered terrorism investigations.  Section 203 establishes a general rule that, notwithstanding any other provision of law, federal law-enforcement personnel may share foreign-intelligence information with intelligence, protective, immigration, national-defense, and national-security personnel.  The Department has regularly utilized this authority to share information in connection with its terrorism investigation, and the Attorney General is finalizing procedures to institutionalize such cooperation.  (Section 203: Authority to Share Criminal Investigative Information)


-     Authorizes the Director of the FBI to hire translators to support counter-terrorism operations, without regard to federal personnel limitations.  The Department regularly utilizes this expanded authority, with great results in improving the efficiency and efficacy of intelligence operations.  (Section 205: Employment of Translators by the Federal Bureau of Investigation)


-          Improves the ability of law-enforcement officers to enlist the help of third parties, such as landlords, in conducting court-ordered surveillance.  Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”) permitted the government to require certain third parties—including common carriers, landlords, and custodians—to assist in conducting court-ordered surveillance.  However, previous law did not allow law-enforcement personnel to seek the assistance of a third party unless the FISA court has issued an order specifically naming him, which required repeated trips to court, wasting valuable time and resources.  Section 206 allows law-enforcement officers to enlist the help of a newly discovered third party by presenting him with a generic court order.  This enhances the government’s ability to monitor international terrorists and intelligence officers who are trained to thwart surveillance by rapidly changing hotel accommodations, cell phones, and internet accounts, just before important meetings or communications.  (Section 206: Roving Surveillance Authority Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978)


-          Increases the length of surveillance and search orders granted by court.  Under previous law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court could only authorize investigations of foreign powers’ employees for up to 45 days.  This required law-enforcement personnel to waste valuable time and resources renewing court orders.  Section 207 permits the FISA court to authorize physical searches and electronic surveillance of foreign powers’ employees for up to 120 days (other persons could be searched / surveilled for 90 days) and further authorizes search / surveillance orders to be extended for periods of up to one year.  Section 207 would apply only to foreign nationals.  (Section 207: Duration of FISA Surveillance of Non-United States Persons Who Are Agents of a Foreign Power)


-          Expedite seizure of voice-mail.  Previous law applied different standards to the seizure of unopened emails stored in a computer and unopened voice-mail messages stored with a service provider.  The government can obtain unopened emails by obtaining a search warrant, but needed a wiretap order to get unopened voice-mail messages from a service provider.  Section 209 treats unopened voice-mail like unopened email, requiring that a search warrant be used.  This expedites seizure of voice-mail, and abolishes the current anomalous distinction between voice and data.  Section 209 preserves officers’ ability under current law to obtain opened messages through a subpoena.  (Section 209: Seizure of Voice-Mail Messages Pursuant to Warrants)


-          Authorizes investigators to subpoena information about an internet user’s “temporarily assigned network address” (the internet equivalent of a telephone number), as well as billing records.  Under previous law, the government could issue an administrative subpoena to electronic communications providers that required them to disclose a small class of records, including a customer’s name, address, length of service, and long-distance telephone billing records.  All other records—including those relating to the internet, which increasingly is terrorists’ preferred method of communicating—could be obtained only through the cumbersome court-order process.  In fast-moving terrorist investigations, the delay can be significant.  Internet communications often are a critical method of identifying conspirators and determining the source of the attacks.  This provision authorizes investigators to subpoena information about an internet user’s “temporarily assigned network address,” as well as their billing records.  Speedy acquisition of this information could identify a perpetrator and link an individual terrorist to a larger organization.  Section 210 satisfies a vital law-enforcement need with only a minimal intrusion on privacy interests; it would not allow the government to obtain records of a user’s browsing activity.  (Section 210: Scope of Subpoenas for Records of Electronic Communications)


-          Cable companies subject to the same rules as other internet providers.  Many cable companies have begun to provide Internet and telephone service, and some companies have refused to comply with search warrants or subpoenas for records of their customers’ telephone and Internet use citing the Cable Act’s restrictions.  Section 211 clarifies that statutes governing telephone and Internet communications (and not the burdensome provisions of the Cable Act) apply to cable companies that provide Internet or telephone service in addition to television programming.  Section 211 clarifies that when a cable company acts as a telephone company or an Internet service provider, it must comply with the same disclosure laws that apply to any other telephone company or Internet service provider.  (Section 211: Clarification of Scope)


-          Allows communication providers to voluntarily disclose content of subscribers’ communications in emergencies that threaten death or serious bodily injury.  Previous law did not allow communications providers to disclose the content of their subscribers’ communications in emergencies that threaten death or serious bodily injury – and even though providers could disclose content to protect their rights and property, they could not in the same circumstances disclose non-content records (such as a subscriber’s login records).   The law thus prevented communications providers from acting quickly to prevent imminent terrorist or other criminal activity, and hindered their ability to protect themselves from cyber-terrorists and -criminals.  This section authorizes a provider to disclose its customers’ communications if it believes that an emergency threatens death or serious injury.  Immediate disclosure is critical, because there may be no time to obtain process.  Section 212 protects customers’ privacy interests because it merely allows, rather than requires, providers to disclose communications; the government cannot compel the disclosure of records.  Section 212 also clarifies that providers voluntarily may disclose both content and non-content records to protect their computer systems, protecting the infrastructures.  In one example, this provision was used to investigate a threat against a high school in Canada, where authorities obtained disclosure information from an internet service provider in the United States and identified the perpetrator, who confessed to the threat.  (Section 212: Emergency Disclosure of Electronic Communications to Protect Life and Limb)


-          Eases the legal requirements of law-enforcement officials to obtain court permission for pen/trap orders in international terrorism investigations.  Previously, FISA authorized pen register / trap and trace orders—which enable law enforcement to collect non-content information about a communication—in investigations to gather foreign-intelligence information or information about international terrorism.  In contrast to the wiretap statute, FISA requires government personnel to certify, not just that the information they seek is relevant, but that the device to be monitored has been used to contact a foreign agent engaged in international terrorism.  Under section 214, the government can more easily obtain a pen / trap order in investigations intended to protect against international terrorism or “clandestine intelligence activities.”  Pen / trap orders would be available if the information to be obtained, or the device to be tapped, is relevant to an international-terrorism investigation.  This provision clarifies that the government may not gather information from a United States individual’s protected First Amendment activities.  (Section 214: Pen Register and Trap and Trace Authority Under FISA)


-          Allows law-enforcement officials to more easily obtain business records in international terrorism cases.  Previously, FISA made it extremely difficult for law-enforcement personnel to obtain business records in connection with a foreign-intelligence investigation.  Section 215 authorized certain law-enforcement personnel to apply to the FISA court for an order requiring the production of any tangible thing.  The application must certify that the records are sought as part of an investigation of international terrorism or “clandestine intelligence activities.”  A United States person cannot be investigated on the basis of First Amendment protected activities.  (Section 215: Access to Records and Other Items Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act)


-          Authorizes courts to grant pen/trap orders in relation to the Internet, and makes the order effective anywhere in the United States.  Pen registers and trap and trace devices enable law-enforcement personnel to collect non-content information associated with communication.  They do not allow officers to eavesdrop on the conversation; they only reveal which numbers are dialed by, or received by, a particular telephone.  Law enforcement may use pen registers and trap and trace devices only by obtaining a court order.  Under previous law, such orders were valid only in the issuing court’s jurisdiction, and it was unclear whether pen registers and trap and trace devices could be used to track internet communications.  This provision authorizes courts to grant orders that are valid “anywhere within the United States,” ensuring law-enforcement officials no longer have to apply for new orders each time their investigation leads them to another jurisdiction.  Section 216 clarifies that the pen/trap provisions apply to facilities other than telephone lines, such as the internet.  This enables law enforcement to trace terrorists’ communications regardless of the media they use.  Law enforcement officials may not eavesdrop on the content of a communication, and this provision does not lower the standard courts use in deciding whether to issue a pen/trap order.  The Department has issued guidance clearly delineating departmental policy regarding the avoidance of “overcollection,” i.e., the collection of “content” in the use of pen registers or trap and trace devices governed by the statute.  (Section 216: Modification of Authorities Relating to Use of Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devices)


-          Allows computer victims of hackers to request government assistance in monitoring and apprehending trespassers.  The wiretap statute previously prevented government assistance when victims of computer trespassing request help in monitoring unauthorized attacks.  Section 217 allows victims of computer attacks to authorize persons “acting under color of law” to monitor trespassers on their computer systems in a narrow class of cases.  Section 217 thus helps place cyber-intruders on the same footing as physical intruders: victims can seek law-enforcement assistance in combating hackers just as burglary victims can invite police officers into their homes to catch burglars.  Section 217 does not authorize law-enforcement authorities to intercept the communications of legitimate computer users.  (Section 217: Interception of Computer Trespasser Communications)


-          Increases availability of searches and surveillance under FISA.  Under previous law, law-enforcement personnel who applied for electronic surveillance or physical searches under FISA were required to certify that “the” primary purpose of their investigation was to gather foreign intelligence.  This required officers constantly to monitor the relative weight of their investigations’ criminal and intelligence purposes.  Section 218 clarified that the government may conduct FISA surveillance or searches if foreign-intelligence gathering is “a significant” purpose of the investigation.  This change reduces officers’ need to evaluate whether their investigations have predominantly criminal or intelligence purposes, and allows increased collaboration between law-enforcement and intelligence personnel.  The Department has implemented, and continues to refine, procedures to effectuate this provision. (Section 218: Foreign Intelligence Information)


-          Allows law-enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred.  Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure required law-enforcement personnel to obtain a search warrant in the district where they intend to conduct a search.  Terrorism investigations often span a number of districts, and officers therefore must obtain multiple warrants in multiple jurisdictions, creating unnecessary delays.  Section 219 provides that warrants can be obtained in any district in which terrorism-related activities occurred, regardless of where they will be executed.  This provision does not change the standards governing the availability of a search warrant, but streamlines the search-warrant process.  (Section 219: Single-Jurisdiction Search Warrants for Terrorism)


-          Allows a court, which has jurisdiction over the offense being investigated, to compel the release of stored communications by issuing a search warrant valid anywhere in the United States.  Under previous law, the government had to use a search warrant if it wished to obtain unopened email from a service provider.  But a court sitting in one jurisdiction is not able to issue a warrant that is valid in another jurisdiction.  This requirement unnecessarily delays officers’ access to critical information.  Section 220 allows a court, which has jurisdiction over the offense being investigated, to compel the release of stored communications by issuing a search warrant that is valid anywhere in the United States.  Section 220 would not dilute the substantive standards governing a search warrant’s availability.  (Section 220: Nationwide Service of Search Warrants for Electronic Evidence)


-          Provides the President with flexibility to impose certain trade sanctions.  The previous law prohibited the President from imposing unilateral agricultural and medical sanctions against foreign entities and governments.  Section 221 made an exception for sanctions on devices that could be used to develop missiles or other weapons of mass destruction.  It also expanded the President’s ability to restrict exports to the Taliban, or the portions of Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban.  In addition, section 221 clarified that nothing in the Trade Sanctions Act limits the availability of penalties for exporting agricultural or medical goods to various foreign terrorist organizations and drug traffickers.  (Section 221: Trade Sanctions)



ü  Removing Obstacles to Investigating Terrorism (USA PATRIOT Title V):


-          Allows the Secretaries of State and the Attorney General to offer rewards to combat terrorism.  The Justice Department’s appropriations act strictly limits the Attorney General’s ability to pay rewards (the Attorney General could not spend more than $2 million on an individual reward, and the total amount of rewards he could offer in a year was $10 million).  Similarly, the State Department had somewhat limited authority to pay rewards in terrorism investigations.  Given the increasing sophistication of terrorist acts, and the global organizations that plot them, these limitations may hamper the government’s ability to punish the guilty.  Sections 502 authorizes the Attorney General to pay rewards of whatever amount he determines necessary to combat terrorism, and Section 503 enhances the State Department’s ability to pay rewards to help punish terrorists.  (Section 502: Attorney General’s Authority to Pay Rewards to Combat Terrorism; Section 503: Secretary of State’s Authority to Pay Rewards)


-          Authorizes the collection of DNA evidence from anyone convicted of a federal crime of terrorism or a crime of violence.  Previously, the government had only a limited ability to collect DNA samples from convicted felons, and could not take DNA samples from persons convicted of many terrorist crimes, including hijacking an airplane or bombing a building.  Indeed, DNA samples could not be collected even from terrorists convicted under federal law of murder.  This provision extends DNA sample collection to anyone convicted of a “federal crime of terrorism” as well as to a person convicted of a “crime of violence.”  Collecting DNA from convicted criminals could make it possible to solve crimes by matching their DNA profiles to biological residues found at crime scenes.  The Department is finalizing proposed regulations to implement this additional authority and further enhance our capacity to utilize DNA technology.  (Section 504: DNA Identification of Terrorists)


-          Allows federal officers who conduct electronic surveillance or physical searches under FISA to coordinate with federal law-enforcement officers to prevent attacks.  Section 505 allows “federal officers” who conduct electronic surveillance or physical searches under FISA, to coordinate with federal law-enforcement officers to defend against a number of national-security threats.  These include actual or potential attacks, grave hostile acts, sabotage, international terrorism, or a foreign power’s clandestine intelligence activities.  (Section 505: Coordination with Law Enforcement)


-          Extends the jurisdiction of the Secret Service and FBI to investigate computer fraud, and gives the FBI authority to investigate computer-fraud offenses involving espionage and foreign counterintelligence.  Previously, the Secret Service had authority to investigate violations of various subsections of a statute that criminalizes computer fraud, but Section 507 would extend the Secret Service’s jurisdiction, concurrently with the FBI’s, to reach any violation of the statute.  This provision also gives the FBI primary authority to investigate a number of specific computer-fraud offenses, including those involving espionage, foreign counterintelligence, or national-defense information that is protected against unauthorized disclosure.  (Section 507: Extension of Secret Service Jurisdiction)


-          Allows law-enforcement in limited situations to access educational information and statistics.  Previously, the law generally prohibited educational institutions from releasing information from student-education records without the student’s consent.  This provision has the potential to frustrate the government’s efforts to investigate acts of terrorism.  Section 508 overrides this prohibition for the limited purpose of assisting counterterrorism investigations.  Also, the law previously restricted the production of information from the National Center for Education Statistics.  Section 509 would eliminate these restrictions, and would allow high-ranking Justice Department personnel to collect information if there are specific and articulable facts giving reason to believe that the records contain information related to a grave felony or an act of terrorism.  (Section 508: Disclosure of Educational Records; Section 509: Disclosure of Information from NCES Surveys)



ü  Strengthening the Criminal Laws Against Terrorism (USA PATRIOT, Title VIII):


-          Punishing terrorist attacks on mass transit systems.  Section 801 created a new federal crime: attacking a mass transit system.  Among other things, it is illegal to wreck a mass transportation vehicle or place a biological toxin near a mass transportation vehicle.  (Section 801: Terrorist Attacks and Other Acts of Violence Against Mass Transportation Systems)


-          Punishing bioterrorists.  Previously, the law made it illegal to possess biological toxins “for use as a weapon,” which may have required the government to prove that the suspect specifically intended to use the toxins in biological warfare.  Section 802 made the prohibition on possessing biological toxins somewhat broader: the government now only has to prove that the defendant had the toxins for anything other than a peaceful purpose.  Section 802 also made it unlawful to possess a biological toxin in a quantity suggesting the defendant had no peaceful purpose.  (Section 802: Expansion of the biological weapons statute)


-          Prohibiting the harboring of terrorists.  Under the old law, it was illegal to harbor persons engaged in espionage, but there was no provision making it illegal to harbor persons engaging in terrorism.  Section 803 made it a crime to conceal persons who are known to be engaging in various terrorism offenses, including destroying aircraft, arson, destroying energy facilities, and use of weapons of mass destruction.  (Section 803: Prohibition Against Harboring Terrorists)


-          Punishing individuals who provide “material support” to terrorists.  Previous law made it a crime to provide terrorists with various types of material support, including currency, lodging, training, and weapons.  Section 805 added “monetary instruments” to the list, thereby clarifying that “material support” includes all forms of money.  It also prohibits providing terrorists with “expert advice or assistance,” given that terrorists increasingly rely on expert services to accomplish their aims.  (Section 805: Material Support for Terrorism)


-          Eliminating and lengthening statutes of limitations for terrorism crimes.  Before the USA PATRIOT Act, most federal crimes had five-year statutes of limitations, and some terrorist crimes had eight-year limitations periods.  Section 809 abolished the statute of limitations for terrorism crimes resulting in, or creating a foreseeable risk of, death or serious bodily injury (other terrorism crimes will retain the current eight-year statute of limitations).  Violent terrorists can now be prosecuted regardless of how long it takes to apprehend them.  (Section 809: No Statute of Limitations for Certain Terrorism Offenses)


-          Enhancing penalties for terrorist conspiracies.  Before the USA PATRIOT Act, the maximum federal penalty for conspiracy was five years--regardless of the severity of the underlying offense.  Section 811 authorized maximum penalties for attempts or conspiracies to commit certain terrorism offenses that are equal to the maximum penalties for the underlying crimes.  The crimes include arson, torture, and providing material support to terrorists.  (Section 811: Penalties for Terrorist Conspiracies)



ü  Improved Intelligence (USA PATRIOT Act, Title IX):


-          Establishing procedures for collecting and sharing FISA information.  Section 901 amended the National Security Act of 1947 to require the Director of Central Intelligence to establish requirements for the collection of foreign-intelligence information under FISA, and to assist the Attorney General in ensuring that information derived from FISA surveillance and searches is disseminated so it may be used effectively for foreign intelligence purposes.  (Section 901: Responsibilities of Director of Central Intelligence Regarding Foreign Intelligence Collected Under Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978)


-          Facilitating the sharing of information from criminal investigations.  Section 905 requires the Attorney General to disclose to the CIA Director foreign intelligence acquired by a Justice Department component during a criminal investigation.  It also requires the Attorney General to develop guidelines for information sharing.  The Department, other law enforcement agencies, and intelligence community agencies are finalizing procedures to institutionalize the sharing of information and coordination of activities authorized by this provision.  (Section 905: Disclosure to Director of Central Intelligence of Foreign Intelligence-Related Information with Respect to Criminal Investigations)


-          Requires a study of the creation of a National Virtual Translation Center.  Section 907 directs the CIA and FBI Directors to submit a report regarding the creation of a “National Virtual Translation Center,” an element of the intelligence community that would translate foreign intelligence for other intelligence-community components.  (Section 907: National Virtual Translation Center)


-          Requires the Attorney General to establish a program to train government officials in the use of foreign intelligence.  Section 908 requires the Attorney General to establish a program to train government officials in the identification and use of foreign intelligence.  (Section 908: Training of Government Officials Regarding Identification and Use of Foreign Intelligence)



·         Investigative Guidelines: Implemented New Guidelines to Help Conduct Investigations Capable of Preventing Terrorist Attacks.  The new guidelines reflect the Attorney General’s mission for the Justice Department’s war on terror: to neutralize terrorists before they are able to strike.  The revised guidelines create new information- and intelligence-gathering authorities to detect terrorist plots, and strengthen existing provisions to promote effective intervention to foil terrorists’ plans.  Now they are poised for prevention.  The Attorney General, on May 30, 2002, released four guidelines, including:


-          General Crimes, Racketeering and Terrorism Investigations

-          FBI Undercover Operations

-          Confidential Informants

-          Lawful, Warrantless Monitoring of Verbal Communications


The Guidelines Allow the FBI to Work to Prevent Crimes, Rather than Just Investigating Past Crimes.  The previous guidelines generally barred the FBI from taking the initiative to detect and prevent future crimes, unless it learned of possible criminal activity from external sources.  As a result, the FBI was largely confined to a reactive role.


-     Authorizing the FBI to Have Normal Public Access to Public Places.  Under the old guidelines, FBI field agents were inhibited from visiting public places, which are open to all other citizens.  Agents avoided them not because they were barred by the Constitution, or any federal statute, but because of the lack of clear authority under administrative guidelines issued decades ago.  The new guidelines clarify that FBI field agents may enter any public place that is open to other citizens, unless they are prohibited from doing so by the Constitution or federal statute, for the specific purpose of detecting or preventing terrorist activities.  The guidelines do not, and cannot, nullify any existing Constitutional or statutory duty to obtain judicial approval as required to conduct their surveillance or investigations.


-     Enhances Information-Gathering Ability, Allows General Internet Searches and Commercial Research Data.  In the past, there was no clear basis for conducting online research for counterterrorism purposes—even of publicly available information—except when investigating a specific case.  For example, FBI agents could not conduct online searches to identify websites in which bomb-making instructions or plans for cyberterrorism are openly traded and disseminated.  The new guidelines strengthen the FBI’s intelligence-gathering capabilities by expressly stating that agents may engage in online research, even when not linked to an individual criminal investigation.  They also authorize the FBI to use commercial data mining services to detect and prevent terrorist attacks, independent of particular criminal investigations.


-     Allows FBI Field Agents to Use Information Collected in the Earliest Stages To Investigate Groups Suspected of Terrorism.  Under the old Guidelines, preliminary inquiries—where agents gather information before enough evidence has been uncovered to merit an outright investigation—could be used only to determine whether there was enough evidence to justify investigating an individual crime.  They could not be used to determine whether to open a broader investigation of groups involved in terrorism (i.e., “terrorism enterprise investigations”).  The FBI will be able to use preliminary inquiries to determine whether to launch investigations of groups involved in terrorism (i.e., “terrorism enterprise investigations”).


-     Expanding the Scope and Duration of Investigations, and Easing Red Tape for FBI Field Agents.  The previous guidelines impeded the effective use of criminal intelligence investigations (i.e., investigations of criminal enterprises) by imposing limits on the scope of such investigations, short authorization periods, and burdensome approval and renewal requirements.  The guidelines now expand the scope of criminal intelligence investigations, lengthen their authorization periods, and ease the approval and renewal requirements.  This flexibility enhances the FBI’s terrorism-preventing function and helps the agents in the field.



Field Offices Are Authorized to Make More Decisions, and FBI Headquarters Will Analyze Information.   In the past, FBI Headquarters was responsible for decision-making, but lacked the field information needed to make sound decisions.  The revised guidelines enhance FBI headquarters’ ability to analyze critical intelligence information, and enable field offices to make more independent investigative decisions.


-          Strengthening FBI Headquarters’ Intelligence-Gathering and Analysis Capabilities.  The old guidelines contained no clear authority to engage in counterterrorism information gathering and analysis, apart from investigations in particular criminal cases.  The revised guidelines allow the FBI to operate counterterrorism information systems, and to collect and retain information from all lawful sources, including publicly available sources, for that purpose.  They also expressly state that all such activities must be based on a valid law enforcement purpose, and must be consistent with applicable statutes and regulations.  The guidelines prohibit the FBI from using this authority to keep files on citizens on the basis of their constitutionally protected activities.


-          Increasing Decision-Making Authority in the Field.  Before the revisions, FBI field agents were hampered by burdensome rules requiring them to secure headquarters’ approval before launching counterterrorism investigative activities.  As a result, field agents lost significant investigative opportunities as they waited for headquarters to consider their requests over a period of weeks, or even months.  FBI headquarters thus lacked the ability to analyze the information necessary to make informed investigative decisions.   Special Agents in Charge at FBI field offices may now approve and renew terrorism enterprise investigations.  (Under the old guidelines only by the Director or an Assistant Director at FBI headquarters could approve such investigations.)  The revisions also allow a Special Agent in Charge to authorize for up to a year preliminary inquiries, which are used to gather information about a crime before enough evidence is discovered to justify a full investigation.  (The old guidelines only authorized 90-day preliminary inquires, and required the approval of FBI headquarters for 30-day extensions.)



Agents Now Know They Can Use All Lawful Investigative Methods When Investigating Suspected Terrorists.  The old guidelines lacked clear direction to use lawful, authorized methods to prevent terrorism.  As a result, FBI agents have declined to use available investigative techniques when investigating crimes committed by affiliates of some political and religious organizations.  The revised guidelines make clear that investigations of suspected terrorists with ties to religious and political organizations will proceed according to the principle of neutrality.  As President Bush has noted, our enemy is not any one faith or creed, but “a radical network of terrorists.”


-          Lawful Techniques Can Be Used in All Investigations of Suspected Terrorists.  The new guidelines simply clarify that agents who are investigating suspected terrorists, even if they have ties to religious and political groups, could use the same investigative techniques they would use when investigating any other type of organization.  At no time will religious or political entities be singled out for special scrutiny, but neither will terrorists with ties to such groups be granted effective immunity from lawful investigations.


-          Investigations Can Only Take Place When There Is Evidence of Criminal Activity.  Under the revised guidelines, agents can investigate suspected terrorists with ties to religious or political groups only when they are acting on the basis of information that shows a possibility (for preliminary inquiries) or a reasonable indication (for full investigations) of criminal activity.  All investigative activities must have a legitimate law-enforcement purpose; these new tools do not provide the FBI with the unlimited authority to conduct investigations of any group.  The revised guidelines continue to require notice to FBI headquarters and federal prosecutors about investigations of religious and political groups, and continue to require approval by FBI headquarters and prosecutors for undercover investigations of such groups.


ü  Preserving Constitutional and Statutory Limitations.  The work of the FBI remains subject to all applicable constitutional and statutory limitations.  The investigative guidelines do not, and cannot, authorize the FBI to do anything prohibited by the Constitution or federal law.  Instead, they impose restrictions on FBI investigative activities that supplement other legal limits.  The guidelines expressly state that:  “All requirements for the use of such methods under the Constitution, applicable statutes, and Department regulations or policies must, of course, be observed.”  [General Investigations Guidelines, Introduction, § C]


ü  Protecting Constitutional Rights.  The investigative guidelines stress that the FBI may not use investigative activities as a pretext for suppressing suspects’ constitutional rights.  As the guidelines expressly state, “It is important that such investigations not be based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment or on the lawful exercise of any other rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.”  (General Investigations Guidelines, May 29, 2002)



     New Regulation Issued by the Justice Department on Attorney-Client Monitoring: “National Security; Prevention of Acts of Violence and Terrorism”  (the Part 501 Special Administrative Measures rule).  The Justice Department’s attorney-client monitoring rule (BOP 1116) allows law-enforcement personnel to monitor communications between an extremely limited class of detainees and their lawyers.  The Attorney General first must certify that reasonable suspicion exists to believe that the detainee may use communications with his lawyer to facilitate acts of terrorism.  Only a handful of the approximately 158,000 federal inmates would be eligible for monitoring.


ü  Elaborate Safeguards and Notification: The rule contains elaborate procedural safeguards to protect detainees’ right to the effective assistance of counsel: (1) the detainee and his attorney will be notified before their communications are monitored; (2) the monitoring team will be separated from prosecutors by a firewall; (3) the monitoring team may not retain any privileged information; and (4) absent an imminent emergency, the monitoring team must obtain a court order before it discloses any information.


ü  Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, who was convicted in 1995 of plotting to bomb New York City landmarks, and who allegedly has used his attorney to pass instructions to a terrorist organization, has been subjected to the new authority.




Refocusing on Prevention:

Reforming the Structure of the FBI to Prevent Future Attacks. . .


·         The Attorney General and Director Mueller Have Taken Many Steps to Improve the FBI’s Structure Since September 11th.  As Director Mueller told FBI employees recently, “Our goal in counterterrorism is prevention.  It is not, as in the past, reacting to attacks with excellence and bringing terrorists to justice.  Our goal is prevention. . . . This means a constant need to reassess – and as necessary shift – resources to address counterterrorism. We will need to be more flexible and agile in addressing the constantly shifting terrorism threat.  Our enemy is not static and we must not be either.”


·         May 29, 2002: The FBI Announced Ten Reshaped Priorities Which Focus First on Preventing Terrorist Attacks:


1)      Protect the United States from terrorist attack

2)      Protect the United States against foreign intelligence operations and espionage

3)      Protect the United States against cyber-based attacks and high technology crimes

4)      Combat public corruption at all levels

5)      Protect civil rights

6)      Combat transnational and national criminal organizations and enterprises

7)      Combat major white-collar crime

8)      Combat significant violent crime

9)      Support federal, state, local and international partners

10)  Upgrade technology to successfully perform the FBI’s mission


·         Director Mueller Has Announced Aggressive Reorganization of FBI Headquarters:


ü  November 2001: Director Mueller Announced Phase One:  The first phase included major changes such as four new executive assistant directors to oversee counterintelligence and counterterrorism, criminal investigations, law enforcement services, and administration; significant changes in internal reporting authority; two new divisions to address computer-facilitated crimes and security; and, four new offices to address significant issues relating to information technology, intelligence, records management, and law enforcement coordination with our state and local partners


ü  May 29, 2002: Director Mueller Announces Phase Two:  This phase seeks budget authority to hire approximately 900 new agents with specialized skills, and significantly restructures the FBI’s operating structure.


·         The Restructuring of the FBI Is Progressing Rapidly:


ü  Overall Improvements:


-          Four Executive Assistant Directors created for Criminal Investigations, Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence, Law Enforcement Services, and Administration


-          Target recruitment of new agents, analysts, translators and others with specialized skills and backgrounds


-          Create the College of Analytical Studies and enhance analytical capabilities with personnel, technology and training that has an increased emphasis on counterintelligence and counterterrorism


-          Reorganize and enhance the Office of Strategic Planning


-          Create new Records Management Division to improve internal handling of records and information


-          The NCIC database, accessible by 640,000 state and local law enforcement officers, has been expanded to include names and identifying information of subjects of domestic and foreign terrorism investigations


-          Establish a new Office of Law Enforcement Coordination to institutionalize information sharing and coordination with state and local law enforcement.  Security clearances for appropriate state and local law enforcement officers have also been expedited.


ü  Counterterrorism Actions:


-          Restructure Counterterrorism Division to shift from reactive orientation to proactive.  In addition to the hiring of the new Deputy Assistant Director for Counterterrorism, this includes creating new units to focus on analysis, as well as the coordination and direction of counterterrorism investigations.  This also entails redefining the relationship between FBIHQ and the field, as well as permanently shifting additional resources to Counterterrorism.


-          Increase the Counterterrorism Team from the 2,178 FBI agents/JTTF resources available pre-9/11 to over 3,700 FBI Agents/ JTTF resources:[1]  In addition to new staffing from the JTTFs and supplemental increases, this plan also redirects 480 agents from other areas to counterterrorism.  400 agents would come from the drug investigation area, 59 from white-collar crime, and 59 from violent crime.  480 agents would be redirected to the Counterterrorism field, with the remaining 38 agents going to the Security Division and Training Division HQ.


-          Build a national terrorism response capacity that is mobile, agile and flexible.  This includes establishing “flying squads” to coordinate national and international investigations.


-          Establish a national Joint Terrorism Task Force and an Office of Intelligence


-          Creation of new weekly bulletin on counterterrorism matters for state and local law enforcement


ü  Counterintelligence Actions


-          Restructure Counterintelligence Division with hiring of new Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence and redefining the relationship between FBIHQ and the field.


-          Establish new Espionage Section to focus on counterespionage cases


-          Develop new national strategy for counterintelligence, and reorient strategy to identify/protect key targets of foreign interest.  Enhance focus on emerging strategic threats.


-          Committed to hiring more than 100 intelligence analysts


-          Establish counterintelligence career path for Special Agents


-          Adopt security measures to protect FBI investigations and information


ü  Accelerating Overhaul of the FBI’s Technology System.  Developing new database applications to support a “paperless” office, the FBI has accelerated plans to reform the information infrastructure and develop plans to better gather, analyze, and share information and intelligence.


ü  New FBI Investigative Groups and Divisions Were Created or Expanded.


-          The Cyber Division was created, with regional Computer Forensic Laboratories and expanded alliances with other federal, state and local law enforcement and private sector/ academia


-          The Investigative Technology Division was created


-          The Financial Review Group was created


-          The Document Exploitation Group was created


-          The E-Mail Exploitation Group was created


-          The Telephone Applications Group was expanded


-          The Threat, Warning, Analysis and Dissemination Groups were expanded


·         Increased Coordination With The CIA:


ü  Joint Threat Matrix


ü  Morning Briefing by CIA for FBI Director


ü  Exchange of Briefing Material


ü  Joint Briefing of President


ü  New Office of Intelligence Headed by CIA Officer


ü  CIA Analysts and Analysis Being Detailed to the FBI


ü  FBI Employees Detailed to Joint Counter-terrorism Center


ü  Joint Work on Document Exploitation and Email Exploitation


ü  Joint Field Office Visits and Reports


ü  Enhanced Coordination Overseas


ü  Increase in CIA on Joint Terrorism Task Forces


ü  CIA on National Joint Terrorism Task Force



Keeping Our Borders Secure:

Restructuring the Immigration and Naturalization Service. . .



·         New Tools to Increase Border Security Provided by the USA PATRIOT Act  (USA PATRIOT Act, Title IV):


ü  Enhances Our Ability to Exclude or Deport Terrorists from the United States.  Even though terrorists have long been inadmissible and removable from the country under the immigration laws, it was difficult to accomplish their exclusion or removal because of various statutory loopholes in the definitions concerning terrorism.  Section 411 addressed these problems by broadening the Immigration and Nationality Act’s terrorism-related definitions.  For example, it expanded the grounds of inadmissibility to include aliens who provide assistance to terrorist organizations.  At the Attorney General’s request, the Department of State has listed 46 entities as terrorist organizations pursuant to authority under this provision.  (Section 411: Definitions Relating to Terrorism)


ü  Requires the Detention of Terrorist Aliens.  Section 412 requires the Attorney General to take into custody aliens who have been certified as threats to the national security.  As a general matter, such aliens must be detained until they are removed from the United States, or until the Attorney General determines that they no longer pose a threat.  (Section 412: Mandatory Detention of Suspected Terrorists; Habeas Corpus; Judicial Review)


ü  Gives the Secretary of State Discretion, on a Case-By-Case Basis, to Provide Visa-Records Information to Foreign Governments, for the Purpose of Combating International Terrorism or Crime.  Previous law limited the State Department’s ability to disclose information from visa records.  As a consequence, it was very difficult for foreign governments to obtain visa-records information, which may be useful in international terrorism investigations.  Section 413 gives the Secretary of State the discretion, on a case-by-case basis, to provide visa-records information to foreign governments, for the purpose of combating international terrorism or crime.  Section 413 also gives certain countries general access to the State Department’s lookout databases, as long as they use the information only to deny visas to persons seeking entry.  This provision enhances the United States’ ability to combat terrorism by encouraging cooperation with foreign governments, which is essential in an age of global terrorist networks.  (Section 413: Multilateral Cooperation Against Terrorists)


ü  Authorizes Appropriations to Fund National-Security Operations on the Northern Border, and Requires a Study of Possible Enhancements to the FBI’s Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System.



     New or Revised Regulations Issued by the Justice Department Since 9/11:


ü  Zadvydas Rule: Detention of Aliens Subject to Final Orders of Removal (Special Circumstance).  On November 14, the Justice Department announced a new regulation (INS 2156) governing the detention of aliens who are subject to a final order of removal.  The rule is a response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), which held the previous regulations unconstitutional.  The Zadvydas rule includes new provisions that govern Immigration and Naturalization Service determinations as to whether there is a significant likelihood that an alien will be removed from the United States in the near future, and whether special circumstances justify the continued detention of certain aliens.


ü  48-Hour Rule: “Custody Procedures” (the Part 287 rule).   The Justice Department’s 48-hour rule, made effective on September 17, 2001, allows the INS to detain certain aliens without filing charges for up to 48 hours or, in the case of an emergency, for “an additional reasonable period of time.”  It amended an earlier regulation that provided for a 24-hour detention period.  The longer detention period will give the INS the time it needs to establish an alien’s true identity, to check databases and records systems for relevant information about the alien, and to coordinate with law-enforcement agencies in the United States and abroad.


ü  Automatic Stay Rule: “Review of Custody Determinations”  (Part 3 Automatic Stay).  On October 29, 2001, the Justice Department promulgated a rule that allows the INS to temporarily stay an immigration judge’s decision to release an alien on bond.  The stay lasts ten days, during which time INS decides whether to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals.  The stay will remain in place if INS elects to appeal.  The Department’s new rule is designed to preserve the status quo while an alien’s entitlement to bond is being adjudicated.  It amends the existing automatic-stay authority, which applies only to cases involving aliens who are subject to mandatory detention.


ü  Protective Orders in Immigration Administrative Proceedings.  EOIR 133 authorizes immigration judges to issue protective orders and seal records relating to law enforcement or national security information.  It ensures that sensitive information can be protected from general disclosure while affording use of that information by the respondent, the immigration judges, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and reviewing courts.


ü  Release of Information Regarding Immigration and Naturalization INS Detainees in Non-Federal Facilities.   INS 2203 governs the public disclosure by any State or local government entity or by any privately operated facility of the name and other information relating to certain immigration detainees.  This rule clarifies that non-Federal entities shall not release information relating to INS detainees, and that requests for public disclosure of information relating to such detainees, including INS detainees temporarily being held by non-Federal providers on behalf of the INS, will be directed to the INS.


ü  The “Surrender” Rule.  In general, INS 1847 bars the exercise of discretion to grant certain kinds of discretionary relief for a period of 10 years -- such as asylum, change of status, reopening of removal proceedings, waivers of inadmissibility, voluntary departure -- to aliens who have previously failed to surrender as required.


ü  Limiting the Period of Admission for B-2 Nonimmigrant Aliens.  INS 2176 eliminated the minimum period of admission of B-2 visitors for pleasure, reduced the maximum admission period of B-1 visitors for business and B-2 visitors from 1 year to 6 months and established greater control over a B visitor's ability to extend status or change status to that of a nonimmigrant student.


ü  The “SEVIS Rule.”   The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System addressed the insufficiency of current measures to track nonimmigrant foreign students and exchange aliens. The “SEVIS” rule (INS 2185) will establish a system to track the status of foreign students in the U.S.  SEVIS will enable schools to electronically transmit current data to INS and the Department of State throughout the student’s stay.  When a student falls out of status, INS will be informed and be able to take appropriate action.


-          Under SEVIS, schools will be required to report the following information to the INS:


·         When a student enrolls at the school

·         The start date of the student's next term or session

·         A student's failure to enroll as planned

·         A student dropping below a full course of study without prior authorization

·         Any other failure to maintain status or complete the program

·         A change of the student's or dependent's legal name or address

·         Any disciplinary action taken by the school against the student as a result of the student being convicted of a crime

·         A student's graduation prior to the program end date listed on the SEVIS form


ü  “Requiring Change of Status From B to F-1 or M-1 Nonimmigrant Prior to Pursuing a Course of Study”  (the Mohammed Atta rule).  The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, highlighted the need for INS to maintain greater control over the ability of aliens to change nonimmigrant status once admitted to the United States.  INS 2195 amended INS regulations by eliminating a prior provision that allowed nonimmigrant visitors for business (B-1) or pleasure (B-2) to begin attending school without first obtaining approval of a change of nonimmigrant status request from INS.


ü  The Flight School Rules.  On June 11, 2002, the Justice Department sent two rules to the Federal Register to establish the Flight Training Candidate Checks Program (FTCCP).  The FTCCP system implements the Attorney General's responsibilities under section 113 of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA), which Congress passed after September 11th, to conduct checks on aliens seeking U.S. certified training in the operation of certain aircraft.  ATSA mandated, among other things, that any non-federal U.S. provider of flight instruction seeking to train an alien in the operation of an aircraft over 12,500 pounds must first have their candidates cleared by the Attorney General.  The law states that flight schools must provide information concerning alien candidates so the Attorney General can conduct a risk assessment.  The risk assessments are intended to ensure that persons who might constitute a risk under section 113 to aviation or national security not receive flight training.  The Attorney General has delegated this authority to conduct risk assessments to the Director of the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force (FTTTF).  The system will be brought on-line in two separate phases; flight training providers who wish to train aliens who already know how to fly large aircraft may use the "expedited processing" system effective with publication in the Federal Register – those noncitizens learning to fly for the first time will be subject to a more extensive risk assessment before flight training can commence.



·         Tightened Law Enforcement Presence at Borders.  The U.S. has forged new cooperative agreements with Canada to protect our common borders and the economic prosperity they sustain and we have provided additional personnel to protect our borders. Under the border security agreement, joint teams of U.S. and Canadian law enforcement officials will widen and deepen their enforcement of security along the border.  In addition, the U.S. Border Patrol has been augmented by the National Guard on the Northern Border.



·         INS Absconder Program.  The INS, with assistance from other law enforcement agencies, has begun a proactive initiative to locate and apprehend certain fugitive aliens who have been ordered removed or deported.  Many of these fugitives have been ordered deported because they were convicted of felonies.


·         Reforming the Immigration and Naturalization Service:


ü  November 14, 2001: The Attorney General Announced Phase I of the Restructuring of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.   Major reform elements the Attorney General announced support for include:


-          Splitting immigration services and immigration enforcement into two separate bureaus


-          Eliminating the Regional Director and District Director positions, which have dual responsibilities for services and enforcement.  This will improve accountability and professionalism through a chain of command with specific expertise at all levels.


-          Forming an integrated law enforcement organization that can respond quickly to combat terrorism, human smuggling operations and legal immigration activities at the border and in the interior.


-          Ensuring, through the new Chief Information Officer (CIO), that the Services Bureau maintains access to relevant enforcement data in adjudicating benefit applications.  The CIO, through the Information Coordinator, will also ensure that Enforcement Bureau personnel maintain necessary and appropriate access to data collected by the Services Bureau.


-          Creating an Ombudsman in the Bureau of Immigration Enforcement to provide the public with a means to communicate concerns and complaints.


-          Establishing the Office of Juvenile Affairs, which will report to the Commissioner, to coordinate and standardize INS decision-making on issues affecting unaccompanied minors.


ü  April 17, 2002: The Attorney General Announced a Second Phase of Restructuring Changes for the INS: Knowing that accountability is one of the keys of this restructuring, further changes were announced that redesigned the INS and its chains of command in several ways.


-          Created a stronger, more direct chain of command for the U.S. Border Patrol.   Border Patrol leadership in the field will now report directly to the Border Patrol chief, giving him direct responsibility for Border Patrol operations, and line authority over the 21 sector chiefs in the field.  Previously Border Patrol agents reported to sector chiefs, who reported to a regional director.  The new direct chain of command will help enhance national security by enabling the chief to rapidly deploy personnel and other resources in response to crises anywhere in the United States.


-          Consolidated various detention-and-removal program functions.  To ensure efficiency, effectiveness and accountability in the INS’ detention-and-removal operations, we are creating a direct line of reporting to the head of detentions in Washington, streamlining the reporting procedure.  This will also help ensure that detention policies and procedures are aimed at creating a safe, secure and humane environment for all or detainees, and that they are executed uniformly and consistently throughout the United States.


-          Creating a chief financial officer who will be responsible for sound fiscal management of the agency.


-          Creating a chief information officer who will be charged with improving and integrating the agency's databases and data systems and expanding and enhancing interagency information sharing.


ü  Supported Congressional Proposals Promoting the Reorganization of the INS by Separating Its Service and Enforcement Functions.  Fulfilling President Bush's pledge to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the nation's immigration system, the Attorney General traveled to Capitol Hill to promote the aggressive reorganization of the INS being considered in Congress.




Assisting the Victims:

Helping the Victims and Their Families. . .


·         September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001: The September 11th Victims’ Compensation Fund Program became law with the President’s signature on September 24, 2001.  The Justice Department issued a regulation to implement the Victim Compensation Fund, which provides an alternative to the significant risk, expense and delay inherent in civil litigation by offering victims and their families an opportunity to receive swift, inexpensive and predictable resolution of claims.  On November 26, 2001, the Attorney General announced that Kenneth Feinberg, who has expertise in mediation, arbitration and negotiation, would head the program.


ü  Offices Opened in Several States.  Offices for the September 11th Victims’ Compensation Fund were opened in New York City and Arlington, Virginia in December to begin processing claims.  In January, additional Claim Assistance Sites were opened in Boston, MA; Jersey City, New Jersey; Melville, LI, New York; Metropark, New Jersey; and Stamford, Connecticut.


ü  Compensation to Victims.  The final regulations for the Victims’ Compensation Fund were announced on March 7, 2002. Providing an average award of $1.85 million, the amount of non-economic compensation was increased by providing that the presumed awards will include $100,000 for the spouse and each dependent of a deceased victim. This is in addition to $250,000 presumed non-economic award for each deceased victim. Offsets of collateral source funds such as life insurance, pensions, death benefits, will be minimized where allowed under the legislation and, the time period for obtaining medical treatment was increased from 24 to 72 hours (and even longer for certain rescue personnel) for victims who were unable to obtain timely medical care or unable to realize the nature of their injuries. 369 claims under the September 11th Victims’ Compensation Fund had been filed as of close of business on Thursday, March 7, 2002.


·         Grants to Help Victims of the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks.  The Justice Department's Office for Victims of Crime has provided more than $57 million to California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia to help the victims of the September 11th terrorist attacks and their families.  The grants included funds to compensate victims and to support state and local programs that provided assistance.


·         Making It Easier for Families of Rescue Workers to Submit Claims Under the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Act.  Following the Attorney General’s announcement of procedures to help the families of rescue workers by streamlining the application and approval process of claims submitted under the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Act of 1976 on September 13, 2001, the Justice Department provided families of the fallen law enforcement officers, firefighters, EMTs, and ambulance crew members with a one time award of $250,000.


·         New Benefits Provided Under the USA PATRIOT Act for Victims of Terrorism, Public Safety Officers, and Their Families (USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI):  The Act expedites payments to Public Safety Officers involved in the prevention, investigation, rescue, or recovery efforts related to a terrorist attack, and increases the base amount of benefits from $100,000 to $250,000.


Preventing Backlash Discrimination:

Working with the Arab and Muslim Communities . . .


         The Justice Department Has Been Engaged in Extensive Outreach Activities to the Arab and Muslim Communities.  Following September 11th, the President moved swiftly to protect Arab and Muslim Americans and immigrants from hate crimes and the Department of Justice followed his lead by having the Civil Rights Division sponsor community forums in Chicago, Illinois, and Dearborn, Michigan, on combating ethnically motivated violence as a result of the September 11th terrorist attacks.  Since then the FBI, the Civil Rights Division and the Community Relations Service have held over 250 community forums and meetings to ease potential tensions.


ü  Launching an Initiative Against Backlash Discrimination.  To help combat any post-September 11th backlash against individuals perceived to be of Middle-Eastern origin, Assistant Attorney General Boyd established a post-September 11 Backlash Discrimination Initiative within the Civil Rights Division’s National Origin Working Group.  He also created a Special Counsel position to oversee the Initiative’s outreach efforts and other work.


ü  Prosecuting Backlash Crimes.  The Justice Department has prosecuted 11 cases of backlash discrimination and has investigated approximately 390 incidents since September 11, 2001.  Local prosecutors have prosecuted approximately 70 additional cases.  All of these cases involve alleged discriminatory backlash hate crimes against individuals perceived to be of Middle-Eastern origin, including Arab Americans, Muslim Americans, Sikh Americans, and South-Asian Americans.  The incidents have consisted of telephone, internet, mail, and face‑to‑face threats; minor assaults and more serious attacks; and vandalism, shootings, and bombings directed at homes, businesses, and places of worship.  For example:


-          Patrick Cunningham plead guilty on May 9, 2002 to a violation of 18 USC § 247 for attempting to set fire to automobiles at a Seattle mosque and shooting at the worshipers two days after 9/11.


-          Zachary Rolnik was sentenced to two months in prison and assessed a $5,000 fine, after pleading guilty in federal district court on June 6, 2002, to interfering with the civil rights of Dr. James J. Zogby, the president of the Arab-American Institute.  Rolnik admitted placing a telephone call to Dr. Zogby in Washington on the morning of September 12, 2001, and leaving a voice mail message in which he threatened to kill Dr. Zogby and his children because of Dr. Zogby’s role in encouraging others to participate in the political process and the enjoyment of federal benefits without regard to race, color, religion or national origin.


-          James Herrick pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 245 and was sentenced to 51 months incarceration on January 7, 2002 for filling two glass jars with pillow stuffing and gasoline, placing them against a wall of a Pakistani-American owned restaurant, and lighting the jars, which damaged the exterior wall of the restaurant.


ü  Bringing Communities Together.  Attorney General John Ashcroft and Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Ralph F. Boyd, Jr. have met with dozens of prominent leaders from the Arab and Muslim American and Sikh communities and underscored DOJ’s strong commitment to investigate and prosecute violators of federal hate crime laws.  In addition to the more than 250 town and community meetings conducted by the Department, Assistant Attorney General Boyd has spoken out against violence and threats against individuals perceived to be of a certain race, religion, or national origin, and he has met approximately 20 times with leaders of Arab-American, Muslim-American, Sikh-American, and South-Asian American organizations.  He has also given several speeches to organizations representing the interests of these affected people and their communities.


ü  The Bully Pulpit and a Public Service Announcement.  The Attorney General has made repeated public statements encouraging tolerance and respect.  In addition, he recorded a public service announcement in September of 2001 to promote tolerance and to discourage ethnically- and religiously-motivated harassment and crimes against the Arab, Sikh and Muslim communities.


ü  The Community Relations Service (CRS) Has Conducted a Proactive and Sustained Information, Outreach, and Conflict Resolution Effort with Arab-American, Muslim and Sikh Communities.  For example:


-          Throughout September, October and November, CRS met with leaders of the Arab-American, Muslim, and Sikh communities in and around Washington, D.C. to listen to and address their concerns in the aftermath of September 11.  These initial meetings were critical in guiding CRS’ conflict resolution and violence prevention services in the wake of real and potential backlash against these communities.


-          Regional meetings with community leaders were conducted across the nation, including in cities such as Milwaukee, WI; Brooklyn, NY; Newark, NJ; Columbus, OH; Reading, MA;  La Mirada, CA; and, Tulsa, OK.


ü  A Statement Opposing Employment Discrimination.  The Department of Justice, the U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission and the Department of Labor issued a joint statement against employment discrimination in the aftermath of September 11th.

[1] These numbers include JTTF resources which are estimates.