Search Details

Word: actã (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...authorities could apply for a roving wiretap (allowing surveillance over all a suspect’s communications) if a drug dealer switched cell-phones but could not if a suspected terrorist did the same. Similarly, the controversial “sneak and peek” provision of the Act??which grants warrants allowing officials to search a location without a terror suspect’s knowledge—seems less controversial when one realizes that this procedure was already available for standard policing...

Author: By John Hastrup and Susan E. Mcgregor, S | Title: POINT/COUNTERPOINT | 4/15/2005 | See Source »

Opponents of the law need to get past the Act??s Orwellian name and its connection to the controversial Bush Administration. Even Bush critic Richard Clarke found much to praise at the John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum last year: “I can’t find anything wrong with [the PATRIOT Act], and if I’d had it prior to 9/11, it would have been a hell of a lot easier to stop 9/11...

Author: By John Hastrup and Susan E. Mcgregor, S | Title: POINT/COUNTERPOINT | 4/15/2005 | See Source »

Since the hasty passage of the USA PATRIOT Act just after Sept. 11, 2001, five states and 373 cities have passed resolutions against the Act, with 14 states and hundreds of cities pending similar legislation. At the heart of all of these resolutions is a resistance to the Act??s dangerous and unnecessary power-grabs at the expense of the constitutionally protected civil liberties of the citizens and legal residents of the United States...

Author: By John Hastrup and Susan E. Mcgregor, S | Title: POINT/COUNTERPOINT | 4/15/2005 | See Source »

Gross acknowledged that a California statute—The Uniform Trade Secrets Act??makes it illegal to disclose information if one knows or has reason to know that the information one is disclosing is a trade secret...

Author: By Joseph M. Tartakoff, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER | Title: Frosh Sued by Apple Fires Back | 3/7/2005 | See Source »

...what is 57? The “California Economic Recovery Bond Act?? actually adds at least $6 billion to California’s debt—burning the state in order to save it. Arnold’s plan? Pandering to his party’s base and sticking with no new taxes, not even tax reform that could actually lower rates in exchange for fewer loopholes and higher revenues. And (at least temporarily) surrendering to the legislature by limiting spending cuts to about $5 billion. And what of the extra $17 billion in debt? Paper over some...

Author: By Brian M. Goldsmith, | Title: Terminating California's Future | 12/2/2004 | See Source »

Previous | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | Next