[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 69 (Friday, May 24, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E906-E907]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  CUSTOMS BORDER SECURITY ACT OF 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. EARL BLUMENAUER

                               of oregon

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 22, 2002

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3129) to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2002 and 2003 for 
     the United States Customs Service for antiterrorism, drug 
     interdiction, and other operations, for the Office of the 
     United States Trade Representative, for the United States 
     International Trade Commission, and for other purposes:

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose two specific sections 
of the Customs Border Security Act. Section 141 would provide greatly 
expanded immunity to Customs officer conducting searches. This is 
another one of the post ``Patriot Act'' erosions of constitutional 
protections and judicial oversight that we should all find particularly 
troubling. Customs officers, like other federal law enforcement 
officers, are already entitled to qualified immunity. Judges and juries 
respect the needs of agents to conduct searches in exigent 
circumstances.
  Especially since Congress has recently expanded law enforcement 
powers, it should not simultaneously contribute to by-passing the 
courts' ability to guard against abuses of those powers. Just two years 
ago, the GAO found

[[Page E907]]

disturbing evidence of Customs' use of racial profiling in searching 
African American citizens nine times more often than their white 
counterparts, even though they did not discover contraband with any 
greater frequency. This is not a record upon which we ought to base 
less redress for the victims of illicit searches.
  Section 144 would allow warrantless inspection of outgoing 
international mail, again circumventing judicial oversight. Even the 
U.S. Postal Service said of this intrusion: ``There is no evidence that 
eroding these long-established privacy protections will bring any 
significant law enforcement improvements over what is achieved using 
existing, statutorily approved law enforcement techniques.'' [Letter to 
Chairman Oxley from the USPS, dated 10/11/01). Postal officials can 
always hold mail while they wait for a court to issue a warrant.
  These two provisions play right into the hands of the terrorists, for 
whom the ``rule of law'' was intended as a primary victim of the 
September 11th attacks. We should not allow that to happen. I hope that 
my colleagues will join me in opposing these two misguided provisions 
of H.R. 3129. They will not make our borders any safer.

                          ____________________