Arrested liberties? In the wake of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, government proposals for increased surveillance to disrupt terrorist networks have collided with some of America's most cherished civil liberties. How far should our nation go in trading personal freedoms for safety?

• Author: Vilbig, Peter
• Position: National

In the new America born on September 11, soldiers with automatic weapons stand guard at airports, while F-16 fighter jets thread the skies for rogue aircraft. Postal workers take special precautions, fearing deadly anthrax bacteria in letters and packages. Bags are routinely searched at public buildings; backpacks are forbidden at ballparks, and everywhere, it seems, armed guards ask for ID.

Caught off-guard by a terrorist attack on home soil, Americans have developed a fierce new desire for security. But this elemental human emotion is colliding with several long-held American principles about civil liberties--the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into private life.

"Hard times for civil liberties tend to come at very hard times for the country," says Floyd Abrams, a lawyer specializing in First Amendment issues at Cahill Gordon & Reindel in New York City. "When we feel threatened, when we feel at peril, [constitutional] values are sometimes subordinated to other interests."

The civil liberties landscape began to change within days of the attacks on New York and Washington, D.C. New counter-terrorism steps involve some of the most sweeping expansions of government authority in decades. Among the changes: new government power to tap phones and monitor e-mail, and an increase in the amount of time immigrants can be held under arrest without being charged with a crime.

The media's traditional role of questioning government decisions has a}so been reshaped. Two newspaper columnists lost their jobs after criticizing President George W. Bush in the weeks after the attack. And when Bill Maher, host of ABC's Politically Incorrect talk show, made critical comments about the U.S., he lost two major advertisers and prompted White House press secretary Ari Fleischer to issue a blunt warning: "The reminder is to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do, and this is not a time for remarks like that."

Though Fleischer later backed away from those comments, advocates for civil liberties say they are worried. They paint a dark picture of a future America where criticism of the government is frowned upon, computers scan e-mails for suspicious words, thousands of cameras monitor public spaces, and Americans are required to carry national identity cards containing vital personal information. The technological pieces are already available.

FINDING THE BALANCE

But it hasn't happened yet. Congress, citing civil liberties concerns, balked at several parts of a plan proposed by Attorney General John Ashcroft for expanded government powers to investigate terrorists.

"This is about how we equip our anti-espionage, counterterrorism agencies with the tools they want," says Representative Dick Armey, the House majority leader and a...