In what is being called a “landmark” victory by the American Civil Liberties Union, U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero overturned a portion of the controversial USA Patriot Act on Wednesday.

Marrero ruled that the search of Internet and phone records allowed by the Patriot Act, along with the government’s right never to disclose that the searches took place, is in violation of the U.S. Constitution. It violates the Fourth Amendment because it “bars or deters any judicial challenges to the government searches” and it violates the First Amendment because “its permanent ban on disclosure is a prior restraint on speech,” Marrero said.

This reversal of parts of the Patriot Act is the first action taken since a noticeable wane in its public support. When the act was first proposed to the U.S. Senate in 2001, 99 of the 100 senators approved it in its entirety. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., was the lone senator to vote against it.

But in its three years of existence, the Patriot Act has proven to do nothing to combat terrorism and everything to combat privacy. It was hurried through Congress in the months after Sept. 11 as a written reminder of our hasty reaction to the devastating events.

Now that our country has had time to approach the act dispassionately, much of Congress and the public have come to acknowledge the flaws of the Patriot Act and its frightening infringements upon our constitutional rights. Feingold, the only original detractor, is now being praised as a heroic defender of American civil liberties.

The block is a step in the right direction for America. It shows that we can acknowledge our mistakes, learn from them and correct them. It also serves as encouraging evidence that our system of checks and balances between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government is functioning and effective.

We are realizing now that combating terrorism and preserving our rights are not conflicting ideals. Like Judge Morrero said, personal security is of equal importance to national security.