Raise the banner of individual liberty and govern under it.

In October 2001, in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, Congress passed, and President Bush signed, the USA Patriot Act. The law is intended to prevent future terrorist acts by enhancing various law enforcement tools. Critics argue that the Patriot Act is a dangerous infringement on American civil liberties. Now, more than two years after the passage of the Patriot Act, do we have any evidence that the critics are right? For that matter, do we even know whether the Patriot Act is working to deter terrorism? Should the Patriot Act be allowed to expire, or should its provisions become a permanent part of the war on terrorism?

Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, Congress passed and President Bush signed the USA Patriot Act—legislation intended to thwart the threat of domestic terrorism. Critics were quick to denounce USA Patriot as a dangerous expansion of government power at the expense of our civil liberties. Are the critics right? Or can we win the war on terrorism without sacrificing our civil liberties here at home? And what has the American experience in earlier crises, such as the Civil War and the two world wars, taught us about balancing national security and personal freedom?

TRANSCRIPT ONLY

Democracy and freedom currently hang by a thread in Hong Kong. How much longer will China tolerate dissent before violently crushing the protests? What is America's role and responsibility in the fight to save liberty in Hong Kong?

What happens when South Korean students take a close look at American democracy. By Peter Berkowitz.

Peter Berkowitz on God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World by Walter Russell Mead

With a new law on military commissions, Congress sent the Supreme Court a message, loud and clear: Get out of the war on terror. By John Yoo.

Peter Robinson challenges Mark Krikorian to explain why America -- a nation of immigrants -- should now adopt anti-immigration policies. Krikorian responds by asserting that mass immigration is fundamentally incompatible with a modern society, that it causes a serious erosion of sovereignty, and that it creates a net economic burden on the government. Finally, he details the dangers of transnationalism and multiculturalism that are inherent in immigration today and gives his prescription for solving the problem. (34:52 ) Video transcript

Richard Epstein, the Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a member of its Property Rights, Freedom, and Prosperity Task Force, notes that the conscious decision to make Apple the focal point of a special investigation offers a bittersweet commentary on the fragile state of the US political economy.