The Fourth Amendment

Objectionable if not illegal searches and seizures seem to be the modus operandi for the Clinton administration. Images of the April 22 Gestapo-like, predawn raid of the home of Elian Gonzales’ Miami relatives are still fresh in the minds of most Americans, even the world. The INS agents violently broke through the door of the home without a warrant. They were dressed and armed to provoke maximum intimidation of Elian’s relatives. Although these may be valid tactics to use to frighten terrorists where the lives of innocent hostages are at stake, this was not a hostage situation.

Once again our civil liberties enshrined in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution are in jeopardy in the hands of the Clinton Administration. This amendment states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The picture seen ‘round the world. This is the image the world has of American justice. Even Clinton’s Harvard Law friends claim he violated the Fourth Amendment in seizing Elian Gonzalez from his uncle’s home. This typifies a growing disregard for the Fourth Amendment in America.

Renowned Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz and normally one of Clinton’s biggest defenders, told Fox News Channel’s Paula Zahn the Clinton administration acted "lawlessly" when agents seized 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez from the home of his Miami relatives, calling it "a dangerous day for all Americans."

Laurence Tribe, another liberal Harvard professor, notes that "no judge or neutral magistrate had issued the type of warrant or other authority needed for the executive branch to break into the home to seize the child." He emphasized that the search warrant was "not a warrant to seize the child." Like Dershowitz, Tribe is very alarmed that Reno’s actions "strikes at the heart of constitutional government and shakes the safeguards of liberty."

Another military style raid took place in Arizona on May 10 when federal agents dressed in black assault gear and carrying heavy arms abruptly entered two private homes, interrogating the homeowners at gun point. The tactics of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the FBI and the IRS left the subjects of the raid terrified and badly shaken after being held for eight hours.

The actions of the federal authorities were reportedly taken in the midst of an investigation into what they believed to be an illegal investment scheme. As with the Elian case, the measures taken were far in excess of what the situation called for. One of the subjects of the search, John Wayne Zidar, reported in an interview with World Net Daily on May 20 that he was never shown a warrant and was not permitted to call his attorney. No criminal charges were ever filed against either couple searched.

Compounding the problem of objectionable searches and seizures is the abuse of the forfeiture of personal property. After a year long investigation, the Kansas City Star broke a scandalous story of conflict of interest in which police departments across the country are using seized private property to line their coffers.

Some states require a felony charge before forfeiture can occur, but under federal law, a criminal charge isn’t even needed. Most states laws further require forfeitures to be ordered by a judge, however, federal law enforcement entities do not operate under such restrictions. Many states have laws that require that monies or property acquired through seizure be used for purposes such as education.

In order to evade these state laws, the police often call in a federal agency such as the DEA to do the confiscating for them. The DEA in turn keeps a cut of the money, returning the remainder to the police. As a result, citizens are now victims to forfeiture of property because police skirt state laws by using federal agencies. Even if a citizen is never charged he or she must often wage an expensive legal battle in court to get their property back.

As bad as these assaults on the Fourth Amendment are, they are apparently insufficient for the Clinton Administration. They want to do away with key portions of the Amendment entirely. A Justice Department bill, The Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act, (HR 2987, S. 486) already passed by the Senate, would, in effect, negate parts of the Fourth Amendment.

The Bill has been touted as a tool to help in the fight against the manufacture and sale of methamphetamines, but in actuality ‘Probable Cause’ would be trampled under foot. If passed, the bill will empower federal, state and local authorities to enter automobiles, homes and businesses for any criminal searches without a warrant. Even more alarming, there is a well buried provision that would allow the copying of "intangible" items, such as computer drives and financial documents, for future examination without informing the subject of the search that such copying ever took place.

Fortunately, astute citizens discovered this blatant attack on our liberties, and led by Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA), the offensive language is being removed from this bill and the Bankruptcy Reform Act (H.R. 833), which contains the same language.

These systematic attacks on our Constitution cannot be accidental. Clinton is twisting U.S. law to conform to international law as administered by the World Court and the new International Criminal Court. Once global governance is implemented, the globalists want the UN courts to be superior over our Constitution and U.S. law. This attack on our freedom gives a whole new meaning to Daniel’s vision in 7:23, when he said "The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces." V ks