A little more than one month after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, Congress passed the USA Patriot Act, a series of new laws and regulations that would, according to supporters, give law enforcement officials greater power in stopping terrorists.

But civil liberties watchdogs were suspicious of the measure, which weakened wiretapping laws and search regulations. The Patriot Act also created the crime of "domestic terrorism," a broadly defined charge that could be used to apply to anyone from actual criminals to activists engaging in protests.

The backlash in some corners was immediate but muted. Still, more than three years later, grassroots opposition to the law is growing. So far, four states and 371 communities have passed resolutions protecting civil liberties and taking a stand against the Patriot Act. A little over two weeks ago, Exeter joined that number when voters approved a warrant article that reaffirmed the town's support of the Bill of Rights. Next Monday, the Portsmouth City Council will host a work session on a citizen petition in support of a resolution that asks the city to stand opposed to the Patriot Act. While the resolutions are, for the most part, symbolic, civil liberties activists say these community-sponsored acts of opposition are an important educational tool.

"One of key things that resolutions do is help to educate the local community on what the government is doing in their names," said Nancy Talanian, director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee in Northampton, Mass. "It allows for debate locally on whether they think the government is going too far to curb rights and liberties."

It was that spirit of educating the community that led Herb Moyer to have a warrant article reaffirming the Bill of Rights placed on the ballot at Exeter's recent town meeting.

"This was simply an effort to bring public attention to our rights codified by the above two documents," Moyer said. "Very few of us explicitly know the details of what rights are given and protected by the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, but we recognize efforts made to curtail and restrict those rights."

A study released at the end of January by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation found that nearly three-fourths of high school students in the country either admit they take the First Amendment for granted or do not know how they feel about it. Of the 100,000 students surveyed, more than a third think the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees.

Under the Patriot Act, federal agents can seek records from bookstores and libraries of books that a person suspected of terrorism has read or purchased; the provisions can also place a gag order on booksellers and librarians, keeping them from disclosing they were forced to provide such information.

"Librarians and medical authorities have bemoaned the impacts on their clients' privacy rights as a result of the interpretations of the USA Patriot Act by the Justice Department. We are nothing if we are not a nation of laws," Moyer said.

The New Hampshire towns of Peterborough and Marlborough passed similar resolutions in March 2003; Farmington passed a resolution on March 9, 2005, one day after Exeter approved the matter. On March 14, members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives heard testimony on House Bill 520, Rep. Dick Marple's (R-Hooksett) measure that asks for the state to repudiate the Patriot Act.

Here in Portsmouth, members of the Seacoast Alliance of Democracy presented the City Council last month with a petition signed by more than 500 residents for a resolution against the Patriot Act.

"We all have a stake in this. It's up to communities and states to take notice and let Congress and the federal government know this is not acceptable," said Sue Madden, a member of the Seacoast Alliance for Democracy, at the meeting.

The resolution calls for "local law enforcement officials (to) continue to preserve residents freedom of speech, religion, assembly and privacy," and asks federal and state law enforcement officials to work with the city police department to prevent detentions without charges and racial profiling. As part of the resolution, New Hampshire congressmen are asked to "actively work for repeal of the parts of the Patriot Act and those orders that violate fundamental rights and liberties."

The Council voted to hold a work session on the petition, allowing supporters and detractors to speak about the resolution at a public hearing scheduled for March 28 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.

However, if the Council votes to pass the resolution, it will not make any real changes to the law in Portsmouth.

"Any action that the City Council might take in connection with the Patriot Act would strike me as being symbolic," said Portsmouth city attorney Robert Sullivan.

"The federal law is whatever the federal law is, and the City Council would not have the power to change that," he added.

While the resolutions cannot change federal law, they send a "stronger message" to congressmen and federal authorities than would just a few people calling their legislators, according to Talanian.

"It's the sentiment of a community, and it's local government, as opposed to just one or two people, and I think it accomplishes that goal by making more people aware," she said.