Domestic Surveillance

Domestic Surveillance in the Unites States has been going on for decades without the public 's knowledge. Domestic Surveillance didn 't seem important in the eye of the American government. After the September attacks (9/11) congress started to treat Domestic Surveillance as a number one priority. After September 11th Congress passed a law to use military force for those responsible for the attacks in New York, NY. The go ahead with using military force did not give the President to use surveillance without a warrant. Congress started to pass legislation against counterterrorism efforts. The most controversial measures, including the 2001 USA Patriot Act that gave the US federal government the ability to collect and analyze private information that has identified itself with the United States of America.

The Patriot Act was hastily passed just a month later October and it severely limited the privacy of Americans and gave unprecedented power to the government and private agencies to track innocent Americans, turning regular citizens into suspects.5 In addition, the great technological evolution and emerged of social media that occurred round the same time, and shortly thereafter, created the perfect storm for the emergence of the largely unregulated surveillance society that we live in today.6 The result is digitization of people’s personal and professional lives so that every single digital trace that people leave can be identified, stored, and aggregated to constitute a composite sketch of ourselves and its only getting worse. In 2008, passed the FISA Amendments Act, which expands the government’s authority to monitor Americans’ international communications, in addition to domestic communications.7 In short, after 9/11 the U.S is left with a national surveillance state, in which “the proliferation of government technology and bureaucracies that are able to acquire vast and detailed amounts of digital information about individuals with minimal or no judicial supervision and often in complete secrecy,” giving the government and corporations with access to the data that the government compiles the ability to single

Over the last several years, cyber attacks have been continually rising. This is in response to emerging threats from rogue nations and terrorist groups. They are increasing their attacks on government, military and civilian installations. According to James Clapper (the Director of National Intelligence) these threats have become so severe. It is surpassing terrorism as the greatest challenge facing the nation. In response, the National Security Agency (NSA) began conducting surveillance on those who are involved in these activities and others which are threat to US national security interests. This program became so broad; it started continually collecting phone records and emails on ordinary Americans. This angered many, who felt that the US was acting in a way that circumvented established legal guidelines and procedures. To fully understand what is taking place requires focusing on the event, the government 's response and the ways it did / did not meet our national security goals. Together, these different elements will illustrate what occurred and the lasting impacts on everyone. (Greenwald 2014)

The NSA, or National Security Agency, is an American government intelligence agency responsible for collecting data on other countries and sometimes on American citizens in order to protect the country from outside risks. They can collect anything from the people’s phone data to their browser history and use it against them in the court of law. Since the catastrophes of September 11 attacks, the NSA’s surveillance capabilities have grown with the benefit of George W. Bush and the Executive Branch (Haugen 153). This decision has left a country divided for fifteen years, with people who agree that the NSA should be strengthened and others who think their powers should be limited or terminated. Although strengthening NSA surveillance may help the

The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act) is one of the most controversial pieces of legislation to ever pass through the US Senate. Its critics use fear mongering tactics to scare people into opposition of an intrusive police state which they believe is inevitable given the government’s new powers. They consider the Act an assault on civil liberties and an invasion of the privacy of innocent American citizens. Yet the real issue is not that the government now has new powers, it’s that the American people do not trust our intelligence agencies to handle these new powers properly while still respecting their rights.

After the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001, an American public was shocked, flabbergasted, and lost for words for the first time since Pearl Harbor. Out of these fears the PATRIOT act was conceived; promising to help stop future terrorist plots the bill was initially met with high praise from the public and media. It was not for another decade that the side-effects of the patriot act were revealed to the world. The American public was appalled at the circumvention of their fourth Amendment rights. Still there is a clear divide between those who believe that the National Security Agency Is not violating the constitution and what they are doing is good for the betterment of the country and those who believe that their privacy and undeniable American freedoms were violated in part of the NSA spying with both parties bringing their own views and ideals to the field. The September eleventh attacks were the beginning of the end of privacy for American citizens the PATRIOT act which was signed a month later granted full access to the phones and computers of the people. It took over a decade for the public to become aware of the illegal spying that the NSA had conducted. The NSA spying is a complicated and controversial matter while there have been several judicial courts that have ruled against the spying there has also been just as many cases of the court 's finding the spying constitutional.

The Patriot Act is lengthy and encompasses many issues but its primary purpose was to protect the American Public. I will focus this paper to how the surveillance aspect affects the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, and collection of Metadata.

The PATRIOT Act stands for “Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”. The documents was signed into law and created by George W. Bush on October 26, 2001, after the disastrous occurrences of 9/11 (Haugen 151). However, the document itself is not only unconstitutional, but it was passed unconstitutionally by the executive branch, legislators, and Congress. The PATRIOT Act itself limits civil liberties by allowing surveillance on American citizens, inside the country and outside the country, through the assistance of the NSA and the FISA Court (Egendorf 23). Furthermore, the act was passed with no thought in Congress because the country was in fear of what might happen after the tragic attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

Ever since the American public was made aware of the United States government’s surveillance policies, it has been a hotly debated issue across the nation. In 2013, it was revealed that the NSA had, for some time, been collecting data on American citizens, in terms of everything from their Internet history to their phone records. When the story broke, it was a huge talking point, not only across the country, but also throughout the world. The man who introduced Americans to this idea was Edward Snowden.

Prior the passage of the PATRIOT Act, the FISA Act gave the procedures “for requesting judicial authorization for electronic surveillance and physical search of persons engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the United States on behalf of a foreign power” (Aftergood 2). However after the 2001, the powers of the FISA Act had become augmented far beyond the provisions of its original 1978 bill. For example, the original use of the FISA Act was for only “the purpose of foreign intelligence” (Baker 12) but the language in the Patriot Act changed the purpose of the FISA Act to “a purpose, which thus making the FISA process generally available to law enforcement not engaged in foreign intelligence work” (Baker

Officially given its name on the fourth of November 1952, the National Security Agency was developed to ensure the safety of American citizens (Howe 11). In an effort to prevent any unauthorized spying on innocent civilians a court known as FISA was created in 1978 to regulate the NSA. Up until the events of September 11th, 2001, the NSA was used strictly as a tool for foreign investigation to decipher international communications (“Frequently Asked Questions About NSA” 1). Twenty-three days after the Twin Towers fell, President Bush passed the Patriot Act (“Timeline of NSA Domestic Spying” 16). This act ushered the NSA into a position of limitless capability. Millions of Americans are having their personal lives followed, tracked, and recorded into mass data pools. This unethical acquisition of personal information is in strict violation of the Fourth Amendment. Immediate action must be taken by the Government to return the rights assured by our Founding Fathers and the Constitution.

Government surveillance in the past was not a big threat due to the limitations on technology; however, in the current day, it has become an immense power for the government. Taylor, author of a book on Electronic Surveillance supports, "A generation ago, when records were tucked away on paper in manila folders, there was some assurance that such information wouldn 't be spread everywhere. Now, however, our life stories are available at the push of a button" (Taylor 111). With more and more Americans logging into social media cites and using text-messaging devices, the more providers of metadata the government has. In her journal “The Virtuous Spy: Privacy as an Ethical Limit”, Anita L. Allen, an expert on privacy law, writes, “Contemporary technologies of data collection make secret, privacy invading surveillance easy and nearly irresistible. For every technology of confidential personal communication…there are one or more counter-technologies of eavesdropping” (Allen 1). Being in the middle of the Digital Age, we have to be much more careful of the kinds of information we put in our digital devices.

Digital privacy concerns, which have been a major issue in our country since 2001, increasingly violate our basic human rights as global citizens. The growing amount of government surveillance has manifested in the enactment of acts such as SOPA and CISPA. Although their intent on stopping digital piracy and attacks were clear, both were immediately met with harsh criticism; they allowed big corporations to violate our privacy rights by sharing our personal information with both other companies and the government. Our President, although publicly expressing his acknowledgement of the issue, failed to discuss an array of other pressing dilemmas regulated by the recently exposed National Security Agency (NSA), especially those involving

“The consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival” (Orwell). The world today is full of many dangers domestic and abroad. It has become a routine in the news to report on the daily mass shooting or update with the war on terror. We live in a world where being worried is justified; however, we should not give up our constitutional rights in the face of fear. The NSA’s dragnet surveillance programs, such as PRISM, are both ineffective and are surpassed by less questionable national security programs. The FISA court's’ approval of NSA actions are not only illegal, but exist as an embarrassing formality. Surveillance is a necessary

The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator