BILL NUMBER: AB 2343 INTRODUCED
BILL TEXT
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Members Robert Pacheco and Rod Pacheco
(Coauthor: Assembly Member La Suer)
FEBRUARY 21, 2002
An act to amend Sections 629.50, 629.51, 629.52, 629.54, 629.56,
629.58, 629.60, 629.68, 629.70, 629.72, 629.74, 629.76, 629.78,
629.80, 629.82, 629.86, 629.88, 629.89, 629.90, 629.91, and 629.94
of, to add Section 629.57 to, and to repeal Section 629.98 of, the
Penal Code, relating to interception of communications, and declaring
the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2343, as introduced, Robert Pacheco. Terrorism.
Existing law makes it unlawful to possess, use, or threaten to use
weapons of mass destruction or restricted biological substances and
destructive devices, as specified.
Under existing law, courts can permit the interception of certain
wire, electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communications if there is probable cause to believe that the subject
of the intercepted communications had committed, or was going to
commit, an enumerated offense. Existing law requires the application
to detail the facilities from which, or place where the interception
is to take place, as specified. Existing law also makes provision
for emergency intercept authority in certain situations, in which
oral permission can be granted by a court as specified. Existing law
requires progress reports to the court regarding any interception
orders no less than every 3 days. Existing law requires certain
parties to assist in the intercepts, if ordered, provides for the
payment of the reasonable cost of their assistance, and provides
civil and criminal immunity for their good faith efforts to assist.
Existing law makes it a misdemeanor or felony to disclose the
contents of intercepted communications, as specified. The law which
authorizes the interception of communications is set to repeal itself
on January 1, 2003.
This bill would add to those enumerated offenses that permit a
court to order the interception of wire or electronic communications
the provisions relating to weapons of mass destruction, destructive
devices, and other enumerated provisions while deleting language
descriptive of explosives-related conduct, and would add attempts to
commit any of the enumerated bases for getting an order. It would
permit a prosecutor to get emergency authority to expand an existing
order to intercept communications from other facilities upon a
specified showing. This bill would clarify that the communications
covered by these provisions include e-mail and electronically stored
messages. It would permit an application to list the facility or
facilities from which interception is anticipated, clarifying that
more than one communications device can be covered in a single
application. It would add Internet service providers and private
cellular telephone providers to those parties who are required to
assist in intercepting communications, and who are provided
reasonable expenses and immunity for that assistance. It would
expand the interception of communications provisions to cover all
electronic pagers, not only those which are digital. It would allow
up to 6 days between progress reports regarding an interception
order. It would also clarify the application of the provision making
it a misdemeanor or felony for a party to disclose any
communications intercept under this chapter. This bill would also
eliminate the January 1, 2003 repeal of the provisions authorizing
communications intercepts.
By expanding the definition and duration of criminal provisions,
this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as
an urgency statute.
Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 629.50 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.50. Each application for an order authorizing the
interception of a wire, electronic digital pager,
or electronic cellular telephone communication shall be made in
writing upon the personal oath or affirmation of the Attorney
General, Chief Deputy Attorney General, or Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Criminal Law Division, or of a district attorney, chief
deputy district attorney, or assistant district attorney, to
the presiding judge designated by the presiding judge. Each
application shall include all of the following information:
(a) The identity of the investigative or law enforcement officer
making the application, and the officer authorizing the application.
(b) The identity of the law enforcement agency that is to execute
the order.
(c) A statement attesting to a review of the application and the
circumstances in support thereof by the chief executive officer, or
his or her designee, of the law enforcement agency making the
application. This statement shall name the chief executive officer
or the designee who effected this review.
(d) A full and complete statement of the facts and circumstances
relied upon by the applicant to justify his or her belief that an
order should be issued, including (1) details as to the particular
offense that has been, is being, or is about to be committed, (2) the
fact that conventional investigative techniques had been tried and
were unsuccessful, or why they reasonably appear to be unlikely to
succeed or to be too dangerous, (3) a particular description of the
nature and location of the facility or facilities from
which or the place where the communication is to be intercepted, (4)
a particular description of the type of communication sought to be
intercepted, and (5) the identity, if known, of the person committing
the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted, or if
that person's identity is not known, then the information relating to
the person's identity that is known to the applicant.
(e) A statement of the period of time for which the interception
is required to be maintained, and if the nature of the investigation
is such that the authorization for interception should not
automatically terminate when the described type of communication has
been first obtained, a particular description of the facts
establishing probable cause to believe that additional communications
of the same type will occur thereafter.
(f) A full and complete statement of the facts concerning all
previous applications known, to the individual authorizing and to the
individual making the application, to have been made to any judge of
a state or federal court for authorization to intercept wire,
electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular
telephone communications involving any of the same persons,
facilities, or places specified in the application, and the action
taken by the judge on each of those applications.
(g) If the application is for the extension of an order, a
statement setting forth the number of communications intercepted
pursuant to the original order, and the results thus far obtained
from the interception, or a reasonable explanation of the failure to
obtain results.
The judge may require the applicant to furnish additional
testimony or documentary evidence in support of the application.
SEC. 2. Section 629.51 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.51. For the purposes of this chapter , the following
terms have the following meanings :
(a) "Electronic digital pager communication"
means any tone or digital display or tone and voice pager
communication.
(b) "Electronic cellular telephone communication" means any
cellular or cordless radio telephone communication.
(c) "Wire communication" includes written, voice, video, or other
messages or information sent through e-mail media.
SEC. 3. Section 629.52 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.52. Upon application made under Section 629.50, the judge may
enter an ex parte order, as requested or modified, authorizing
interception of wire, electronic digital pager, or
electronic cellular telephone communications , including any
wire communications in computer facilities or related electronic
equipment, initially intercepted within the territorial
jurisdiction of the court in which the judge is sitting, if the judge
determines, on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant,
all of the following:
(a) There is probable cause to believe that an individual is
committing, has committed, or is about to commit, one of the
following offenses:
(1) Importation, possession for sale, transportation, manufacture,
or sale of controlled substances in violation of Section 11351,
11351.5, 11352, 11370.6, 11378, 11378.5, 11379, 11379.5, or 11379.6
of the Health and Safety Code with respect to a substance containing
heroin, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamine, or their analogs where the
substance exceeds 10 gallons by liquid volume or three pounds of
solid substance by weight.
(2) Murder, solicitation to commit murder, the commission of a
crime involving the bombing of public or private property,
or aggravated kidnapping, as specified in felony
involving a destructive device in violation of Section 12303,
12303.1, 12303.2, 12303.3, 12303.6, 12308, 12309, 12310, 12312, or a
violation of Section 209.
(3) Any felony violation of Section 186.22.
(4) Conspiracy Any felony violation of
Section 11351, 11351.5, 11352, 11418, 11418.5, 11419, or 11451.
(5) An attempt or conspiracy to commit any of the
above-mentioned crimes.
(b) There is probable cause to believe that particular
communications concerning the illegal activities will be obtained
through that interception, including, but not limited to,
communications that may be utilized for locating or rescuing a kidnap
victim.
(c) There is probable cause to believe that the facility or
facilities from which, or the place where, the wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communications are to be intercepted are being used, or are about to
be used, in connection with the commission of the offense, or are
leased to, listed in the name of, or commonly used by the person
whose communications are to be intercepted.
(d) Normal investigative procedures have been tried and have
failed or reasonably appear either to be unlikely to succeed if tried
or to be too dangerous.
SEC. 4. Section 629.54 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.54. Each order authorizing the interception of any wire,
electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular
telephone communication shall specify all of the following:
(a) The identity, if known, of the person whose communications are
to be intercepted, or if the identity is not known, then that
information relating to the person's identity known to the applicant.
(b) The nature and location of the communication facility or
facilities as to which, or the place where, authority to
intercept is granted.
(c) A particular description of the type of communication sought
to be intercepted, and a statement of the illegal activities to which
it relates.
(d) The identity of the agency authorized to intercept the
communications and of the person making the application.
(e) The period of time during which the interception is authorized
including a statement as to whether or not the interception shall
automatically terminate when the described communication has been
first obtained.
SEC. 5. Section 629.56 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.56. (a) Upon informal application by the Attorney General,
Chief Deputy Attorney General, or Chief Assistant Attorney General,
Criminal Law Division, or a district attorney, the presiding judge of
the superior court or one other judge designated by the presiding
judge may grant oral approval for an interception, without an order,
if he or she determines all of the following:
(1) There are grounds upon which an order could be issued under
this chapter.
(2) There is probable cause to believe that an emergency situation
exists with respect to the investigation of an offense enumerated in
this chapter.
(3) There is probable cause to believe that a substantial danger
to life or limb exists justifying the authorization for immediate
interception of a private wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication before an
application for an order could with due diligence be submitted and
acted upon.
(b) Approval for an interception under this section shall be
conditioned upon filing with the judge, within 48 hours of the oral
approval, a written application for an order which, if granted
consistent with this chapter, shall also recite the oral approval
under this subdivision and be retroactive to the time of the oral
approval.
SEC. 6. Section 629.57 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
629.57. (a) Upon informal application by the Attorney General,
Chief Deputy Attorney General, or Chief Assistant Attorney General,
Criminal Law Division, or a district attorney, chief deputy district
attorney, or assistant district attorney, the presiding judge of the
superior court or one other judge designated by the presiding judge
may grant oral approval for an interception, without an order, if he
or she determines all of the following:
(1) There are grounds upon which an order could be issued under
this chapter.
(2) There is probable cause to believe that an emergency situation
exists with respect to the investigation of an offense enumerated in
this chapter.
(3) There is probable cause to believe that the target of an
approved interception application is utilizing other wire, electronic
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication with the
purpose of thwarting interception.
(b) Approval for an interception under this section shall be
conditioned upon filing with the judge, within 48 hours of the oral
approval, a written addendum to the approved application for an order
which, if granted consistent with this chapter, shall also recite
the oral approval under this subdivision and be retroactive to the
time of the oral approval.
SEC. 7. Section 629.58 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.58. No order entered under this chapter shall authorize the
interception of any wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication for any period
longer than is necessary to achieve the objective of the
authorization, nor in any event longer than 30 days. Extensions of an
order may be granted, but only upon application for an extension
made in accordance with Section 629.50 and upon the court making
findings required by Section 629.52. The period of extension shall
be no longer than the authorizing judge deems necessary to achieve
the purposes for which it was granted and in no event any longer than
30 days. Every order and extension thereof shall contain a
provision that the authorization to intercept shall be executed as
soon as practicable, shall be conducted so as to minimize the
interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception
under this chapter, and shall terminate upon attainment of the
authorized objective, or in any event at the time expiration of the
term designated in the order or any extensions. In the event the
intercepted communication is in a foreign language, an interpreter of
that foreign language may assist peace officers in executing the
authorization provided in this chapter, provided that the interpreter
has the same training as any other intercepter authorized under this
chapter and provided that the interception shall be conducted so as
to minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject
to interception under this chapter.
SEC. 8. Section 629.60 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.60. Whenever an order authorizing an interception is entered,
the order shall require reports in writing or otherwise to be made
to the judge who issued the order showing what progress has been made
toward achievement of the authorized objective, or a satisfactory
explanation for its lack, and the need for continued interception.
If the judge finds that progress has not been made, that the
explanation for its lack is not satisfactory, or that no need exists
for continued interception, he or she shall order that the
interception immediately terminate. The reports shall be made at the
intervals that the judge may require, but not less than one for each
period of 72 hours 6 days , and shall
be made by any reasonable and reliable means, as determined by the
judge.
SEC. 9. Section 629.68 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.68. Within a reasonable time, but no later than 90 days,
after the termination of the period of an order or extensions
thereof, or after the filing of an application for an order of
approval under Section 629.56 which has been denied, the issuing
judge shall cause to be served upon persons named in the order or the
application, and other known parties to intercepted communications,
an inventory which shall include notice of all of the following:
(a) The fact of the entry of the order.
(b) The date of the entry and the period of authorized
interception.
(c) The fact that during the period wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communications were or were not intercepted.
The judge, upon filing of a motion, may, in his or her discretion,
make available to the person or his or her counsel for inspection
the portions of the intercepted communications, applications, and
orders that the judge determines to be in the interest of justice.
On an ex parte showing of good cause to a judge, the serving of the
inventory required by this section may be postponed. The period of
postponement shall be no longer than the authorizing judge deems
necessary to achieve the purposes for which it was granted.
SEC. 10. Section 629.70 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.70. The contents of any intercepted wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communication or evidence derived from it shall not be received in
evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing, or other
proceeding, except a grand jury proceeding, unless each party, not
less than 10 days before the trial, hearing, or proceeding, has been
furnished with a transcript of the contents of the interception and
with a copy of the court order and accompanying application under
which the interception was authorized. This 10-day period may be
waived by the judge if he or she finds that it was not possible to
furnish the party with the above information 10 days before the
trial, hearing, or proceeding, and that the party will not be
prejudiced by the delay in receiving that information.
SEC. 11. Section 629.72 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.72. Any person in any trial, hearing, or proceeding, may move
to suppress some or all of the contents of any intercepted wire,
electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular
telephone communications, or evidence derived therefrom, only on the
basis that the contents or evidence were obtained in violation of the
Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution or of this
chapter. The motion shall be made, determined, and be subject to
review in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 1538.5.
SEC. 12. Section 629.74 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.74. The Attorney General, any Deputy Attorney General,
district attorney, or deputy district attorney, or any peace officer
who, by any means authorized by this chapter, has obtained knowledge
of the contents of any wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication, or evidence
derived therefrom, may disclose the contents to one of the
individuals referred to in this section and to any investigative or
law enforcement officer as defined in subdivision (7) of Section 2510
of Title 18 of the United States Code to the extent that the
disclosure is permitted pursuant to Section 629.82 and is appropriate
to the proper performance of the official duties of the individual
making or receiving the disclosure. No other disclosure, except to a
grand jury, of intercepted information is permitted prior to a
public court hearing by any person regardless of how the person may
have come into possession thereof. In particular,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, a public utility,
Internet service provider, private cellular telephone provider,
landlord, custodian, or other person shall not willfully disclose,
directly or indirectly, to the target or to any unnecessary party,
the existence or content of any communication that is intercepted.
SEC. 13. Section 629.76 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.76. The Attorney General, any deputy attorney general,
district attorney, or deputy district attorney, or any peace officer
or federal law enforcement officer who, by any means authorized by
this chapter, has obtained knowledge of the contents of any wire,
electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular
telephone communication, or evidence derived therefrom may use the
contents or evidence to the extent the use is appropriate to the
proper performance of his or her official duties and is permitted
pursuant to Section 629.82.
SEC. 14. Section 629.78 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.78. Any person who has received, by any means authorized by
this chapter, any information concerning a wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communication, or evidence derived therefrom, intercepted in
accordance with the provisions of this chapter, may, pursuant to
Section 629.82, disclose the contents of that communication or
derivative evidence while giving testimony under oath or affirmation
in any criminal court proceeding or in any grand jury proceeding.
SEC. 15. Section 629.80 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.80. No otherwise privileged wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication
intercepted in accordance with, or in violation of, the provisions of
this chapter shall lose its privileged character. When a peace
officer or federal law enforcement officer, while engaged in
intercepting wire, electronic digital pager, or
electronic cellular telephone communications in the manner authorized
by this chapter, intercepts wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communications that
are of a privileged nature he or she shall immediately cease the
interception for at least two minutes. After a period of at least
two minutes, interception may be resumed for up to 30 seconds during
which time the officer shall determine if the nature of the
communication is still privileged. If still of a privileged nature,
the officer shall again cease interception for at least two minutes,
after which the officer may again resume interception for up to 30
seconds to redetermine the nature of the communication. The officer
shall continue to go online and offline in this manner until the time
that the communication is no longer privileged or the communication
ends. The recording device shall be metered so as to authenticate
upon review that interruptions occurred as set forth in this chapter.
SEC. 16. Section 629.82 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.82. (a) If a peace officer or federal law enforcement
officer, while engaged in intercepting wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communications in the manner authorized by this chapter, intercepts
wire, electronic digital pager, or electronic
cellular telephone communications relating to crimes other than those
specified in the order of authorization, but which are enumerated in
subdivision (a) of Section 629.52, (1) the contents thereof, and
evidence derived therefrom, may be disclosed or used as provided in
Sections 629.74 and 629.76 and (2) the contents and any evidence
derived therefrom may be used under Section 629.78 when authorized by
a judge if the judge finds, upon subsequent application, that the
contents were otherwise intercepted in accordance with the provisions
of this chapter. The application shall be made as soon as
practicable.
(b) If a peace officer or federal law enforcement officer, while
engaged in intercepting wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communications in the manner
authorized by this chapter, intercepts wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communications relating to crimes other than those specified in the
order of authorization, the contents thereof, and evidence derived
therefrom, may not be disclosed or used as provided in Sections
629.74 and 629.76, except to prevent the commission of a public
offense. The contents and any evidence derived therefrom may not be
used under Section 629.78, except where the evidence was obtained
through an independent source or inevitably would have been
discovered, and the use is authorized by a judge who finds that the
contents were intercepted in accordance with this chapter.
(c) The use of the contents of an intercepted wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communication relating to crimes other than those specified in the
order of authorization to obtain a search or arrest warrant entitles
the person named in the warrant to notice of the intercepted wire,
electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular
telephone communication and a copy of the contents thereof that were
used to obtain the warrant.
SEC. 17. Section 629.86 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.86. Any person whose wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication is
intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of this chapter shall
have the following remedies:
(a) Have a civil cause of action against any person who
intercepts, discloses, or uses, or procures any other person to
intercept, disclose, or use, the communications.
(b) Be entitled to recover, in that action, all of the following:
(1) Actual damages but not less than liquidated damages computed
at the rate of one hundred dollars ($100) a day for each day of
violation or one thousand dollars ($1,000), whichever is greater.
(2) Punitive damages.
(3) Reasonable attorney's fees and other litigation costs
reasonably incurred.
A good faith reliance on a court order is a complete defense to
any civil or criminal action brought under this chapter, or under
Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 630) or any other law.
SEC. 18. Section 629.88 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.88. Nothing in Section 631, 632.5, 632.6, or 632.7 shall be
construed as prohibiting any peace officer or federal law enforcement
officer from intercepting any wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication
pursuant to an order issued in accordance with the provisions of this
chapter. Nothing in Section 631, 632.5, 632.6, or 632.7 shall be
construed as rendering inadmissible in any criminal proceeding in any
court or before any grand jury any evidence obtained by means of an
order issued in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
Nothing in Section 637 shall be construed as prohibiting the
disclosure of the contents of any wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communication
obtained by any means authorized by this chapter, if the disclosure
is authorized by this chapter. Nothing in this chapter shall apply
to any conduct authorized by Section 633.
SEC. 19. Section 629.89 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.89. No order issued pursuant to this chapter shall either
directly or indirectly authorize covert entry into or upon the
premises of a residential dwelling, hotel room, or motel room for
installation or removal of any interception device or for any other
purpose. Notwithstanding that this entry is otherwise prohibited by
any other section or code, this chapter expressly prohibits covert
entry of a residential dwelling, hotel room, or motel room to
facilitate an order to intercept wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communications.
SEC. 20. Section 629.90 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.90. An order authorizing the interception of a wire,
electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communication shall direct, upon request of the applicant, that a
public utility engaged in the business of providing communications
services and facilities, Internet service provider, private
cellular telephone provider, a landlord, custodian, or any
other person furnish the applicant forthwith all information,
facilities, and technical assistance necessary to accomplish the
interception unobtrusively and with a minimum of interference with
the services which the public utility, Internet service
provider, private cellular telephone provider, landlord,
custodian, or other person is providing the person whose
communications are to be intercepted. Any such public utility,
Internet service provider, private cellular telephone provider,
landlord, custodian, or other person furnishing facilities or
technical assistance shall be fully compensated by the applicant for
the reasonable costs of furnishing the facilities and technical
assistance.
SEC. 21. Section 629.91 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.91. A good faith reliance on a court order issued in
accordance with this chapter by any public utility, Internet
service provider, private cellular telephone provider,
landlord, custodian, or any other person furnishing information,
facilities, and technical assistance as directed by the order is a
complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought under this
chapter, Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 630), or any other law.
SEC. 22. Section 629.94 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
629.94. (a) The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and
Training, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall establish
a course of training in the legal, practical, and technical aspects
of the interception of private wire, electronic digital
pager, or electronic cellular telephone communications and
related investigative techniques.
(b) The Attorney
General shall set minimum standards for certification and periodic
recertification of the following persons as eligible to apply for
orders authorizing the interception of private wire, electronic
digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone
communications, to conduct the interceptions, and to use the
communications or evidence derived from them in official proceedings:
(1) Investigative or law enforcement officers.
(2) Other persons, when necessary, to provide linguistic
interpretation who are designated by the Attorney General, Chief
Deputy Attorney General, or Chief Assistant Attorney General,
Criminal Law Division, or the district attorney and are supervised by
an investigative or law enforcement officer.
(c) The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training may
charge a reasonable enrollment fee for those students who are
employed by an agency not eligible for reimbursement by the
commission to offset the costs of the training. The Attorney General
may charge a reasonable fee to offset the cost of certification.
SEC. 23. Section 629.98 of the Penal Code is repealed.
629.98. This chapter shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2003, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 24. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the
only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district
will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction,
eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime
or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government
Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of
Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
SEC. 25. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within
the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into
immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are:
To investigate, prosecute, and prevent terrorism, which poses an
immediate and ongoing threat to the safety of this state and its
citizens, it is necessary that this act go into immediate effect.