The Act, aimed at updating both the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and the Electronics Communications Privacy Act of 1986 is composed of 10 titles all of which were hurried through Congress on October 24th, 2001 and passed the senate the following day, “…with little deliberation. Unlike a typical statute, neither the House of Representatives nor the Senate issued a report on the PATRIOT act.” (Standler, 2007-2008, p. 4) To this day, the Patriot Act remains controversial; its supporters uphold it as a requirement for The War on Terrorism and for the enforcement of modern electronic communications law. The Act’s critics cite its numerous infringements on civil and individual rights. Title II, considered the most controversial, deals directly with surveillance, wiretapping, and computer fraud. Title II also details sanctions placed on trade with the Taliban, Syria and North Korea. The Patriot Act’s Title II, Enhanced Surveillance Procedures is a breach of privacy and infringes upon the tenants of our Fourth Amendment rights.…
Our forefathers with great fortitude put together a document that would be forever known as the constitution. This document addressed the rights of the citizens of the newly formed states. One amendment has been a focal point of discussion in recent weeks with the leakage of NSA protocol. The fourth amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place…
To ensure expressive, associational, and privacy rights are strengthened instead of being compromised by new technology is the goal of the Protecting Civil Liberties and protect the core democratic rights when corporate and government practices that rely on new technology that invades these rights. The government regularly tracks all calls of nearly every common American and spy on a large number of Americans’ international calls, text messages, and emails. Whistle blower Eric Snowden, a contractor with NSA, willfully and knowingly exposed the government’s most sensitive surveillance techniques without authorization and the most fundamental rights as individuals. The ACLU has been fighting for over 12 years to end government surveillance’s lack of oversight that allows it to invade the rights and lives of millions of Americans. When the case against mass surveillance reached the Supreme Court several years ago, was dismissed due to lack of sufficient evidence of the secret programs. Leading the way, the ACLU’s struggle to rein in the surveillance superstructure which strikes at the core of our privacy rights, freedom of speech and association will continue. ("ACLU: National…
September 11 2001, marked a very tragic day in history, and immediate action was required in order to handle the situation. During the Bush administration, surveillance programs were put into place in order to monitor possible hostile actions towards our country. In a post Snowden article in 2006, Robert A. Levy went into depth about what Article II is and if current programs put into place can be deemed illegal. After reviewing Article II and Levy’s position I agree that it was illegal, but I believe that this was because what need to take place was described vaguely and was left up to interpretation. The fourth amendment speaks about using “reasonableness,” what might be reasonable to one may not mean the same to another. Due to this, abuse…
In 2001, people are quick to dismiss the idea of an internment of American citizens, suggesting that the country has come a long way from 1942. The hypothesis that the government might conduct surveillance or use illegal wiretaps to monitor groups or individuals that it suspects of domestic terrorism seemed foreign before September 11th, and now has become a way to gain more information about potential suspects. These new measures, included in the USA Patriot Act, delicately trace the line between national security and civil liberties. A brief look at how the Bush…
The attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001 saw the largest loss of life of US civilians, in the US, from an outside enemy. As a result of the attacks, President Bush declared a “Global War on Terror.” To prevent another terror attack, Congress felt it must provide additional powers to US law enforcement and intelligence agencies. In 2001, Congress passed the United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept or Obstruct Terrorism Acts of 2001, or colloquially referred to as the PATRIOT Act. While many will argue the PATRIOT Act is helpful in combating terrorism, critics argue it infringes on the 4th Amendment rights of US citizens.…
Take a second to think about that fleeting feeling of being watched. Every second of every minute of every day spent on technology is being recorded and scrutinized, so why is it that the feeling so fleeting? The National Security Agency, or NSA, had such a promising name, but they ultimately slandered and disgraced it with their horrendous violations of privacy. Action must be taken in an effort to abolish the unforgivable acts of domestic surveillance performed every single day by the NSA.…
One September 11, 2001 Islamic Terrorists hijacked several flights and struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The US was shaken by 9/11. In response to the attacks the US passed laws to protect its people. The Patriot Act was one of the laws or acts that was passed in response to the 9/11 attacks. The goals of the Patriot Act were to strengthen domestic security and increase the powers of law-enforcement agencies to stop terrorism. In addition, the US Department of Homeland security created the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) to protect the nation’s Airways. Finally we have organizations such as the NSA that collect domestic and foreign information in order to protect the US. However, we end up sacrificing our privacy without…
Throughout the history of the United States, Americans have always expected a certain level of privacy. This right was granted to them by both the First and Fourth Amendments of the US Constitution. In 2001, then President Georg W. Bush signed into law the US Patriot Act.…
The Patriot ACT has greatly affected how America deals with situations involving terrorism, or threats of terrorism, but the main problem is simple, and that is that it deprives American citizens of certain rights and liberties. And now imagine if you had to choose between your privacy and your safety. Pretty hard choice, right? And this is how many Americans feel today, because they have to make this choice. And this essay will break down what the Patriot Act is and the argument for, and against, the act itself. And this act is relatively new, as it was created in the early 2000’s under the presidential leadership of George W. Bush. And there are multiple reasons why the Patriot Act is unconstitutional, and they will be mentioned, and elaborated on, throughout this essay, such as our right to privacy as American citizens, and our right to our amendments, and will also touch on how the opposition believes that this act is necessary to our survival as a nation and why they are wrong.…
All citizens of The United States deserve their privacy, but in those emergency situations where you have to invade someone’s privacy for the greater good of others than that’s acceptable. The Fourth Amendment offers and important safeguard against unjustified government surveillance, all of us are granted that right when we are born in the United States.…
With the government’s initial intrusion upon our privacy, our fourth amendment rights were violated. Because U.S. citizens’ information was unlawfully stolen, the NSA disregarded our fourth Amendment rights, which states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”(AMENDMENT IV). Because normal U.S. citizens’ information was stolen without reason or consent, the NSA disregarded our fourth Amendment rights to…
Domestic surveillance Have you ever felt like someone was watching you? The reality of the world we live in today is that people are watching us. There is a question standing: is the fact that the government is watching us constitutional or not? Is our privacy being infringed upon through the persistent prying fingers of those with higher authority? Many people have different views on this topic and there are many contributing factors to this issue.…
In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a U.S. law called the Patriot Act was passed under the Bush administration. The goal of passing this law was to strengthen domestic security and broaden the powers of law-enforcement agencies with regards to identifying and stopping terrorists (Grabianowski). The privacy of the American public was first questioned in 2006 when USA Today reported that the NSA had “been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth” and was “using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity” (Greenwald). This article referred to a secret…
There are ten total parts, or titles, in the patriot act and each one covers a different part of growing the security in America in hopes of stopping terrorism. These titles touch on everything from anti-terrorism funding to the ability to wiretap the phone of any suspected terrorist without getting a warrant first. This has brought up many controversial discussions on whether it gives the government too much power and whether it goes against our constitutional rights. This paper will discuss the contents of The Patriot Act and whether or not it should have been signed into law.…