In the months preceding the sunset date, supporters of the act pushed to make those provisions permanent, while critics sought to revise various sections to enhance civil liberties protections.

[24] The title also expanded the duration of FISA physical search and surveillance orders,[25] and gave authorities the ability to share information gathered before a federal grand jury with other agencies.

[28] The Act allowed any district court judge in the United States to issue such surveillance orders[27] and search warrants for terrorism investigations.

[34] Title II established three very controversial provisions: "sneak and peek" warrants, roving wiretaps and the ability of the FBI to gain access to documents that reveal the patterns of U.S. citizens.

These are seen as important by the Department of Justice because they believe that terrorists can exploit wiretap orders by rapidly changing locations and communication devices such as cell phones,[39] while opponents see it as violating the particularity clause of the Fourth Amendment.

The first subtitle also tightened the recordkeeping requirements for financial institutions, making them record the aggregate amounts of transactions processed from areas of the world where money laundering is a concern to the U.S. government.

[63] It also allows the forfeiture of any property within the jurisdiction of the United States that was gained as the result of an offense against a foreign nation that involves the manufacture, importation, sale, or distribution of a controlled substance.

[95] The reason was to make the standard the technology basis for a cross-agency, the cross-platform electronic system used for conducting background checks, confirming identities and ensuring that people have not received visas under different names.

[118] Later, the USA PATRIOT Act was reauthorized and amendments were made to specify a process of judicial review of NSLs and to allow the recipient of an NSL to disclose receipt of the letter to an attorney or others necessary to comply with or challenge the order.

On August 28, 2015, Judge Victor Marrero of the federal district court in Manhattan ruled the gag order of Nicholas Merrill was unjustified.

In his decision, Judge Marrero described the FBI's position as, "extreme and overly broad," affirming that "courts cannot, consistent with the First Amendment, simply accept the Government's assertions that disclosure would implicate and create a risk."

Through the court documents, it was revealed for the first time that through an NSL, the FBI believes it can legally obtain information including an individual's complete web browsing history, the IP addresses of everyone a person has corresponded with, and all the records of all online purchases within the last 180 days.

[135] U.S. forfeiture law was also amended to allow authorities to seize all foreign and domestic assets from any group or individual that is caught planning to commit acts of terrorism against the U.S. or U.S. citizens.

[152] The Inspector General of the Department of Justice was directed to appoint an official to monitor, review and report back to Congress all allegations of civil rights abuses against the DoJ.

", they decided that it was "hard to tell" and stated: The ACLU, in a new fact sheet challenging the DOJ Web site, wants you to believe that the act threatens our most basic civil liberties.

Professor David D. Cole of the Georgetown University Law Center, a critic of many of the provisions of the Act, found that though they come at a cost to privacy are a sensible measure[174] while Paul Rosenzweig, a Senior Legal Research Fellow in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, argues that roving wiretaps are just a response to rapidly changing communication technology that is not necessarily fixed to a specific location or device.

On September 26, 2007, Judge Ann Aiken found the law was, in fact, unconstitutional as the search was an unreasonable imposition on Mayfield and thus violated the Fourth Amendment.

[187] Another group, the Humanitarian Law Project, also objected to the provision prohibiting "expert advise and assistance" to terrorists and filed a suit against the U.S. government to have it declared unconstitutional.

Because they allow the FBI to search telephone, email, and financial records without a court order, they were criticized by many parties, including the American Civil Liberties Union.

Section 215 allows the FBI to apply for an order to produce materials that assist in an investigation undertaken to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.

The association became so concerned that it adopted a resolution condemning the USA PATRIOT Act and urging members to defend free speech and protect patrons' privacy.

Our claim that we are attempting to build an international coalition against terrorism will be severely undermined if we pass legislation allowing even citizens of our allies to be incarcerated without basic U.S. guarantees of fairness and justice.

Russell Feingold, in a Senate floor statement, claimed that the provision "falls short of meeting even basic constitutional standards of due process and fairness [as it] continues to allow the Attorney General to detain persons based on mere suspicion".

British Columbia's privacy commissioner raises concerns that the USA PATRIOT Act will allow the United States government to access Canadians' private information, such as personal medical records, that are outsourced to American companies.

has taken measures to prevent United States authorities from obtaining information, the widespread powers of the USA PATRIOT Act could overcome legislation that is passed in Canada.

Privacy Commissioner David Loukidelis stated in a report on the consequences of the USA PATRIOT Act, "once information is sent across borders, it's difficult, if not impossible, to control".

"[213][214] Sami Al-Arian was a Palestinian-American tenured computer engineering professor at the University of South Florida, who also actively promoted dialogue between the West and the Middle East, especially about the plight of Palestinians.

On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama used an Autopen to sign the PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011, a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act while he was in France:[10] roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the "library records provision"), and conducting surveillance of "lone wolves"—individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups.

The reauthorization act also increased congressional oversight, requiring a semi-annual report into physical searches and the use of pen registers and trap and trace devices under FISA.

[255] On March 10, 2020, Jerry Nadler proposed a bill to reauthorize the Patriot Act, and it was then approved by the majority of US House of Representatives after 152 Democrats joined the GOP in supporting the extension.