Ever since federal legislators passed the USA Patriot Act in the wake of September 11, Cathy Hoffman, director of the Cambridge Peace Commission, has worried about the state of civil liberties in her fair city. But it wasn’t until Hoffman actually riffled through the 350-page legislation — and discovered that it gives the federal government broad access to people’s phone and Internet lines, as well as their medical, financial, and educational records, without a court order — that bells sounded. She says, "The law is a kind of annihilation of the Bill of Rights. It’s astonishing."

And so, Hoffman appealed to her colleagues on the city’s Peace, Human Rights, and Women’s Commissions, who, in turn, put pen to paper. The result is a three-page proposed resolution that calls upon the City of Cambridge to protect its residents from the legislation. The resolution, which will come before the Cambridge City Council later this month, proclaims that civil liberties "are now threatened by the USA Patriot Act," and promises to "affirm [the city’s] commitment to embodying democracy, ... defending human rights and civil liberties now under siege," and to "act in the spirit of our state and federal Constitutions."

If passed, the resolution would effectively ban Cambridge employees from complying with the act, except when forced to do so by law. That means that city officials could not voluntarily turn over demonstration permits to federal authorities, for instance. Nor could they voluntarily relinquish voting records, or hand over the names of any resident who has borrowed public-library books about Islam. "We want to say, ‘No. Not in this city,’" Hoffman says. At the same time, though, the resolution wouldn’t force employees to break the law, either. If the FBI were to ask the Cambridge Police for certain criminal records, the police would have to oblige. Explains Hoffman, "This would just prevent any cooperation from the city."

In any event, the proposed resolution reaffirms an old Cambridge tradition. In 1985, the city stood up for civil rights, and against federal policy, by refusing to release information about its Spanish-immigrant population. At the time, the Reagan administration was waging fierce battles in Central America. The FBI was rounding up Salvadoran, Guatemalan, and Nicaraguan immigrants who were here illegally. For Cambridge, the response was to declare itself a "sanctuary city" for these immigrants. "Part of the notion was to say, ‘We have a different view than our government,’" Hoffman explains. "We believe in those US traditions that support democracy," not repression.

Word about the latest resolution to hit Cambridge has spread in recent weeks — and with impressive results. As many as 500 residents have signed a petition supporting the anti–Patriot Act resolution. Activists intend to circulate it widely until June 10, when city councilors will debate the issue and vote on it.

Hoffman hopes the council will pass this resolution unanimously, as three other Massachusetts towns — Amherst, Leverett, and Northampton — have done with similar proposals. She recognizes that it might be a tough sell. After all, the Bush administration has chosen to define patriotism post–September 11 as strict obedience. But after the fear that comes with terrorism subsides, Hoffman believes, most people want a free, open society. She adds, "I believe that the Patriot Act will ultimately be undone."

And if it is, Cambridge, once again, will be ahead of the curve.