A showdown in the US House of Representatives over extending the controversial Patriot Act fell narrowly to civil libertarians today, foreshadowing a larger fight over a permanent extension. Perhaps for the first time since September 11, many Americans are questioning tougher counter-terrorism enforcement.

The law inspired by the 2001 terrorist attacks, designed to free counter-terrorism activity from civil liberty restrictions, has several sunset clauses due to expire on February 28. Today’s vote to extend those clauses for another year ended 277 to 148, shy of the two-thirds needed to pass under suspension of rules.

At stake are three controversial provisions described by opponents in today’s debate as a “perpetual suspension” of civil liberties:

  1. “Roving” wiretaps that do not require law enforcement to specifying the target or method of communication used.
  2. “Tangible records” requests that require banks, telecoms and libraries to secretly hand over any information about a customer without any suspicion of wrong-doing.
  3. “Lone Wolf” warrants that allow electronic monitoring of a person without connecting the target to an agent of terror or foreign power.

The controversial Patriot Act subpoenas known as “national security letters” — which require no warrant or judicial oversight and carry a gag order — were made permanent in 2006. Republican Senate leaders are currently drafting a bill to make the remaining three expiring provisions permanent also.

The White House issued a statement, making clear it wanted a three year extension only:

“The administration strongly supports extension of three critical authorities that our nation’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies need to protect our national security… This [three-year] approach would ensure appropriate congressional oversight by maintaining a sunset, but the longer duration provides the necessary certainty and predictability that our nation’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies require as they continue to protect our national security.”

Opponents of any extension made strange bed-fellows during today’s debate before an almost entirely empty chamber. Republican libertarians sided with liberal Democrats in the half-hour debate in questioning why the provisions had been allowed to stand for nearly 10 years.

“The Patriot Act is a destructive undermining of the constitution,” Democratic representative Dennis Kucinich said. “When the founding fathers sat down to write the constitution, we didn’t hear give me liberty and give me wiretap.” He also noted that nearly 50,000 national security letters had been issued by the FBI at the time that provision was made permanent in 2006.

Libertarian Republican representative Ron Paul added: “We should question why we’re extending this. Why were these sunsetting? Because people were concerned by these. They were overreach.”

By and large opponents willing to speak up against the Patriot Act are from the fringes of US politics. Moderate Democrats and Republicans voted overwhelmingly in support of the one-year extension. The surprise for many observers was the freshmen class of Tea Party caucus representatives who joined with liberal Democrats — their ideological opponents on most issues — giving the opposition the slight numbers needed to block.

It was the first time since September 11, 2001 that a White House-endorsed homeland security bill has failed to pass.

Representative Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, rejected allegations the constitution was being infringed: “Requests by a third party is not a search under the Fourth Amendment. The user does not own the data.”

The author of the Patriot Act, Representative James Sensenbrenner, also attacked its critics and requested that national security letters not be made part the debate. “We hear an awful lot about no oversight,” he said. “The other side of the aisle can do oversight hearings. They only had one of them in the last Congress. The Republicans have been the ones doing the oversight … while those that [haven’t] have been doing the complaining.”