The National Security Administration’s (NSA) domestic surveillance program was implemented by President George W. Bush soon after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Bush authorized the NSA to start conducting various surveillance activities. Many of these activities authorized had previously been barred by certain laws and agency policy. A small part of the program implemented by the administration was nicknamed “The Terrorist Surveillance Program”. This part of the program allows the NSA to monitor the communications between five hundred to one thousand people in the United States suspected of having connections to Al Qaeda. Other parts of this Program were not aimed at just specific individuals but also millions of innocent Americans, many never suspected of any crime. Although the U.S. government considers this program to be classified, information has been leaked by several whistleblowers. Congressional hearings have taken place and government officials have admitted to the truthfulness of the leaked program information. United States citizens, legal scholars and lawmakers have raised questions about the legality of the National Security Agency (NSA) conducting warrantless wiretapping (Stray). A brief history of wiretapping brings to light some controversial issues with the NSA and their actions. Wiretapping has been around as long as the telephone itself. The first law passed to address wiretapping is the Federal Communications Act, passed in 1934, which states that “no person being authorized by the sender shall intercept any communication and divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such intercepted communications to any person…” (Dept. of Justice). This law doesn’t outlaw wiretappi... ... middle of paper ... ...g technology would bring modern challenges to what they considered to be a fundamental and easily definable right. In my opinion, based on the limited information available, it would appear that the NSA programs, in a broad overview, does indeed violate some people’s Fourth Amendment protected rights. While there will most certainly be more challenges in the Supreme Court as to the “reasonableness” and scope of surveillance programs as it relates to the Fourth Amendment, one measure of success achieved from the implementation of the NSA program would be the number of terrorist attacks and subversion that has been averted. Until the appropriate governmental agencies make this information public, along with information on how the programs are actually implemented, I find it impossible to make a satisfactorily informed judgment about governmental surveillance programs.
The National Security Agency or NSA for short is a United States federal government intelligence organization that is used for global monitoring and collecting data. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush implemented the NSA’s domestic spying program to conduct a range of surveillance activities inside the United States. There has been a lot of controversy surrounding this program as it allows the NSA to tap into the public’s phone calls, cameras, internet searches, text messages, and many other mediums to seek out individuals that may be potential threats to the security of the general public. Many individuals say that the tactics used by the NSA are unconstitutional as they invade people’s privacy. This is primarily
The aftereffects of the September 11, 2001 attacks led to Congress passing sweeping legislation to improve the United States’ counterterrorism efforts. An example of a policy passed was Domestic Surveillance, which is the act of the government spying on citizens. This is an important issue because many people believe that Domestic Surveillance is unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy, while others believe that the government should do whatever is possible in order to keep the citizens safe. One act of Domestic Surveillance, the tracking of our phone calls, is constitutional because it helps fight terrorism, warns us against potential threats, and gives US citizens a feeling of security.
A short background on the laws concerning surveillance will help clear up some misconceptions on the NSA. Back in 1968, the Wiretap Act protected citizens from the government listening to their phone call...
With the introduction of the internet being a relatively new phenomenon, the act of cyber espionage is not something that has been properly acknowledged by society. The American Government has done a stand up job of keeping its methods in the shadows and away from the eyes of its people since its documented domestic surveillance began on October 4th, 2001; Twenty three days after the Twin Towers fell President George Bush signed an order to begin a secret domestic eavesdropping operation, an operation which was so sensitive that even many of the country's senior national security officials with the...
The constitutional issues inside of this wiretap is recording personal conversations and hearing about other crimes. This comes down to a Fourth Amendment and Title III provisions and how they relate to this case. The offender is within his right to expect privacy on his phone calls. If the detectives use this other information they obtained while using the wiretapping warrant for the other crimes the offender could say that they Government overstepped the bounds of the
“Many opponents have come to see the patriot act as a violation of the fourth amendment to the U. S constitution.” (Belanger, Newton 2). The side effect of the patriot act is that it weakens many rights. This act weakens the fourth amendment which is our privacy protection. The fourth amendment allows citizens to be protected from unreasonable searches without a warrant. The police search suspects mainly because of their race or ethnic group.
Whether the U.S. government should strongly keep monitoring U.S. citizens or not still is a long and fierce dispute. Recently, the debate became more brutal when technology, an indispensable tool for modern live, has been used by the law enforcement and national security officials to spy into American people’s domestic.
“The Fourth Amendment wasn't written for people with nothing to hide any more than the First Amendment was written for people with nothing to say.” (Dave Krueger). The Fourth Amendment protects the people's values, including the right of privacy. The Fourth Amendment includes, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, paper, effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure, shall not be violated.” When the founding fathers created the Constitution they ensured the people fundamental laws that would be used to any issue portrayed in the Supreme Court. That gave the people a relief that no one is ever above the law that is created. The privacy of the people was a very big value enforced by warrants. In the case of the
In 2001, the United States fell victim to a multitude of tragedies. The most unforgettable, of course, being the terrorist attack on September 11th. Following the threat, Congress knew something had to be done to strengthen security controls. On October 23, 2001, Jim Sensenbrenner, a Republican Representative, introduced provisions to a previously sponsored House bill. By the next day, the act passed in the House with a vote ratio of three hundred and fifty-seven to sixty-six. The following day, the Senate took a vote on the bill, passing it by ninety-eight to one. Finally, on October 26, 2001, the USA Patriot Act was signed into law. The bill was intended to strengthen federal anti-terrorism investigations. But is the USA Patriot Act working to the full potential that it was originally intended? This is something that we are now going to explore. We will look deeper into, not only what the bill is, but also it’s journey to getting to the final draft and how it got passed. We will also explore the proponents and opponents of the act, and what they have to say about it. Finally, I will shed some light on who exactly is being effected now that this act is in place, and if they have been given a little too much power.
The breath-taking expansion of police power that the United States government took after 9/11 now poses as a troubling issue. Americans need to address the issues of government surveillance because it affects t...
Many people live in fear that they are constantly being watched. Michael Jackson sang it best in the 80 's by saying, "I always feel like, somebody 's watching me," in his hit song with Rockwell. That 's exactly what the NSA and other government organizations are doing today with domestic surveillance. Everywhere Americans go and every corner they turn there is a camera, and every website or email they send is being monitored closely. So what can society do about this? Educate others on the situation and stand up for what is right. Some people believe they must give up some freedoms for protection, but at what cost? What is happening in America is not what the founding fathers fought for. Domestic surveillance should not be allowed because
Adam Penenberg’s “The Surveillance Society” reminds Americans of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the instant effects the that attacks on the World Trade Center had on security in the United States. Penenberg discusses how the airports were shut down and federal officials began to plot a military response. Although those were necessary actions, they were not as long lasting as some of the other safety precautions that were taken. The Patriot Act, which makes it easier for the government to access cell phones and pagers and monitor email and web browsing, was proposed. Politicians agreed that during a war civil liberties are treated differently. From there, Penenberg explains that for years before September 11th, Americans were comfortable with cameras monitoring them doing everyday activities.
What Are Your Rights Worth? George Edward Peele III King &Low Heywood Thomas School. National security has been greatly enhanced by the passage of the Patriot Act. The USA PATRIOT Act is an act of Congress that was signed by President Bush in 2001. The title of the act is a ten-letter acronym that stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.
Domestic Surveillance Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
One of the hottest topics in privacy is regarding our phone conversation with others. It doesn't take a whole lot these days to be in someone's business, in their conversation, breaking the law of privacy with out spending that much time and money. "…Compared to an average monthly phone bill of seventy dollars, the option to wiretap the average phone line is probably worth less than twelve cents a month to police and spy agencies."1 These days, when information is transferred from one person to another, or from point A to point B, there are more people who are interested in know what they are talking about, not just to know but to benefit something out of it. This is illegal if it is done without the knowledge of the individuals involved. Since people are not giving communication privacy enough attention, it is getting to the point that it is out of control of anybody. Anybody can just get up and get in to others conversation with out their knowledge. This is having a big effect in out community these days. There are a lot of scenarios were people are involved in this situation.