Liberty and security -- in defense of both.

As in other periods of crisis -- war, natural disasters, epidemics, stock market collapse -- the public often looks to the government to take action to protect them. After the terrorists' assaults, a large majority of Americans said in surveys they would give up some of their liberties for better security.

Currently, the country's political and military leaders are rightly focusing on two critical tasks: (1) seeking out and then bringing the terrorists' leaders and co-conspirators to justice, and (2) taking steps to protect Americans from follow-up assaults.

In this uncertain and difficult period, most Americans would likely accept a temporary and limited suspension of certain rights for greater safety. After all, a major charge we give to government is to protect our security. Yet some actions and proposals are not temporary but have and would become the law of the land. As such, they raise serious longer term challenges to individual rights, civil liberties, and privacy: Increased surveillance of private citizens through wiretapping and internet surveillance, opening up of students' college records, searches and seizures of assets without due process, holding suspects indefinitely without charges being made, national ID cards, expedited deportation without showing cause. While some decisions about security measures have to be made and carried out swiftly, others that would infringe on individual rights should be deliberated carefully. In those cases, hard decisions have to be made to balance security needs and individuals' rights. Two questions are basic -- whether the proposed action is likely to help in combating terrorism and whether the proposals have unintended consequences affecting individuals' rights:

It is also critical that any such proposal be targeted sufficiently so that it won't cast too wide a net over a host of other innocent actions.

Legislative proposals that would not be temporary measures need careful scrutiny. If hastily enacted without asking basic questions about their relevancy and likely effectiveness in targeting terrorists, some actions would encroach upon Americans' basic rights, especially those provided by the First and Fourth Amendments. Others would open up private citizens' communications and financial transactions to government scrutiny, and could interfere with individuals' ability to defend themselves against charges.

In times of crisis, people seek security, sometimes to the exclusion of all else. As the United States considers appropriate responses to the terrorists' acts of war, it is important not to let the fear factor cloud the American mind, to base our decisions on deliberation and respect for the Constitution and privacy rights.

Fortunately, even in this climate of fear, the issues relating to new security measures and civil liberties are beginning to be scrutinized and debated. Open debate on these issues is also a right that needs to be defended.