Washington ? Getting spied on by the government got easier with a court ruling that was focused on the war on terrorism but also raised concerns that new surveillance powers will be used on innocent citizens.

Civil liberties groups say the decision makes it easier for the government to listen to telephone conversations, read e-mail and search private property of people who have done nothing wrong.

“The barrier between the citizens and their government has been lowered significantly,” said Vermont Law School professor Stephen Dycus, who specializes in national security. “I don’t think the American public has even begun to grasp the kind of sacrifices we’ve been called to make in civil liberties in this war on terrorism.”

The court decision Monday will make it easier for the Justice Department’s criminal and intelligence staffs to work together to gather information. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft moved immediately to increase surveillance of suspected terrorists.

The Bush administration had sought more power after being thwarted this spring in seeking a wiretap to collect information for both national security and law enforcement uses. The administration was a winner in the unusual case ” settled by a court that had never met in its 24-year history in a ruling that may be final.

The decision by a three-judge panel erased restrictions on information sharing and upheld the government’s powers under a new law passed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Lino Graglia, a constitutional law professor at the University of Texas, said national security was most important. “I have very little to hide. From my point of view, that’s an excellent tradeoff,” he said.

Viet Dinh, an assistant attorney general, said last week during a Federalist Society discussion of surveillance that the government would be more effective without the restrictions and would not be heavy-handed. “We have absolutely no interest in gathering information simply for the sake of gathering information,” he said.

Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft gestures during a news conference at the Justice Department to discuss the ultra-secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Ashcroft commented Monday on a federal appeals court panel ruling that the Justice Department has broad discretion in the use of wiretaps and other surveillance techniques to track suspected terrorists and spies.

At the same event, Graglia said that without surveillance limits “The World Trade Center towers would still be standing.”

But Michael Greenberger, who worked on counterterrorism projects in the Clinton administration’s Justice Department, said, “The minute you start hearing prosecutors say ‘I’m not going to abuse the right,’ citizens’ ears ought to perk up.”

Greenberger, who now teaches law at the University of Maryland, said he was concerned that Americans will be monitored with little evidence they are tied to terrorists.

“The first response would be ‘That couldn’t happen in America.’ Under this court’s decision, it could happen,” Greenberger said.

Ruth Wedgwood, an international law professor at Yale and Johns Hopkins Universities, said that the government still must get permission for monitoring.

The requests are processed by a special espionage panel, created nearly 25 years ago as a check on the government’s power to conduct domestic spying.

The so-called spy court must approve wiretaps and other surveillance specifically for suspected spies, terrorists or foreign agents in the United States. It approved 934 applications in 2001.

That panel turned down one wiretap request this spring, prompting the first known appeal to the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, which issued Monday’s decision.