Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Of 1978 (FISA)

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was originally enacted to protect entities from abuse of surveillance for national security reasons. FISA contains policies associated with the process of gathering foreign intelligence by the intelligence community for national security reasons (Addicott & McCaul, 2008, p. 46-47). FISA also consisted of a secret court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), which had eleven unnamed federal judges who issued warrants regarding surveillance or searches for the intelligence community, and a court review board, which consisted of three federal judges who reviewed the actions of the secret court. After the passing of the Patriot Act by the Bush Administration, the NSA was essentially given full authority to collect information on citizens without a warrant, thereby circumventing the FISC, and Bush fully defended the NSA, stating “‘The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time.’” (Schwartz 2009

The USA Patriot Act grants government agencies powers in terrorism investigations that it already uses in non-terrorist crimes. Several law abiding citizens have been approached, questioned, and interrogated without probable cause of any criminal activity, basically for engaging in political speech protected by the constitution (Bailie, 2012). The Act freely eliminates privacy rights for individual Americans, it creates more secrecy for government activities, which make it extremely difficult to know about actions the Government are taking.

Another pro of FISA, and the applicable amendments that followed, is the ability for electronic surveillance to be conducted without a court order for a designated length of time to better facilitate collection and streamline the process under USC. 1802, Sec 102. There are, of course, steps required by high ranking officials, the President and Attorney General, which must be taken to conduct such surveillance without a court order. Also, the criteria to conduct the surveillance is restricted specifically to communications exclusively between foreign powers and must not include “substantial likelihood” that the surveillance will acquire communications pertaining to a United States Person. [4] While the appropriate legal process should always be followed, this provision is necessary at times to bypass the lengthy legal process for obtaining a court order when time restrictions apply.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 was a necessary measure signed by President Jimmy Carter in an effort to stop the CIA, FBI, NSA, and other executive powers from conducting warrantless wiretaps of domestic groups for so-called national security purposes. This was necessary because findings by the Church Committee in the early 1970s suggested that warrantless wiretapping had been going on for quite some time by these government entities and was exacerbated by President Nixon and the Watergate scandal. This bill not only set a future precedent for how surveillance should be conducted, but also attempted to set a standard for what “good” and “bad” surveillance were defined as. FISA did not face any substantial challenges

Ever since the cloudy day on September 11, 2001, when two planes crashed into the twin towers, the United States government has been cracking down on security. The Patriot Act, passed October 26, 2001, was an effort by the United States government to ‘crack down’ on terrorism. The act removed several legal barriers that blocked or restricted law enforcement, intelligence, and defense agencies from storing data about possible terrorist threats and collaborating together to respond to them. The Patriot Act was supposed to make United States citizens feel more secure but in reality it had the opposite effect. Around 2013, when confidential NSA documents were leaked it was found that several government agencies had used the guise of the Patriot Act to monitor millions of United States citizens. In fact, it was found out by several civil liberties groups that the Patriot Act applies to more than just terrorist acts. For example, Title II of the Patriot Act allows government agencies to tap telephone lines and permits the interception of messages that may be relevant to a criminal investigation. Further, the act allows authorities to provide access to any tangible thing(books, records, papers, etc). Today, March 2, 2016, fifteen years after the government was given permission to spy on most of its citizens, the government is trying to spy on all Apple iPhones through the use of a code cracking software.

In 1917 the United States government enacted a much disputed law entitled the Espionage Act. It had been debated in the years leading up to the United States involvement in World War I. Faced with outspoken citizens who were critical of any direct participation in the war and with a growing fear that any public dissent would make it difficult to conscript the needed man power for U.S. involvement, President Woodrow Wilson’s administration looked to make such actions criminal. Throughout the almost 100 year history of the Espionage Act it has come to blows with the United States Constitution, particularly the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech, on many occasions. Thousands of American’s have been charged under the Espionage Act’s

The Patriot Act was signed into law on October 26, 2001 by President George W. Bush. The act expanded the surveillance capability of both domestic law enforcement and international intelligence agencies. When this law was passed it was under the assumption “to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes” (The USA Patriot). The Patriot Act has given the government the power to spy on the average American through monitoring phone records and calls, gaining banking and credit information, and even track a person’s internet activity. This is an unbelievable amount of power intelligence agencies wield all under the umbrella of national security. This power has gone too far, is unjustified, unconstitutional, and infringes on the privacy of the

Americans have always held the rights and liberties close to their hearts. Ever since we became an independent nation. After the tragic events that happened on September 11th, 2001, Citizens of America began to ponder if some of their rights and liberties should be sacrificed to prevent such an attack in the future. National unity took over the country and Americans bonded and held each other up. They stood up in the face of terrorism and the Presidents approval rating soared through the roof (from 54% to nearly a whooping 86% which is the highest level it has ever been). Sadly, the American public rallied behind the Government and provided support for an Act that will come to violate their freedoms that they cherish so much. Congress drafted the US Patriot Act in only 45 days (which leads some to believe that it was already pre-made and was just a combination of a “wish-list” that the FBI had and was waiting for the right time to implement). Still filled with a sense of national pride and deeply scarred by the terrorist attacks which occurred on September 11th, 2001, americans accepted the Act to blatantly avoid being labeled unpatriotic in the eyes of their peers and government. Still, in the face of being labeled “unpatriotic”, many thousands of open minded individuals who saw what this Act could in the future openly question the Government though their cries where heard by mute ears. When the House sent the US Patriot Act to the Senate for approval in 2001,

The Patriot Act modified this so that intelligence gathering need not be the primary purpose for electronic surveillance or secret physical searches. Thus, if an official can certify that obtaining foreign intelligence is a significant purpose of a surveillance action, the other purpose clearly being criminal investigation, he can avoid the requirement that he first show probable cause of criminal activity. This makes it so that the FBI, the CIA, or any other intelligence agency, can surveil Americans without probable cause, as long as they say the surveillance has something to do with a foreign intelligence

Have you ever had a suspicion of someone and wanted to know if it’s true? That is exactly what the government thinks and finds out. They collect info on potential people they suspect are terrorists or are related to any terrorist activities. The official Patriot Act was passed after the September 11th, 2001 terror attacks. The Patriot Act is actually an acronym for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”. This federal act allows the investigators to use the same tools used for organized crime and drug trafficking, now in the fight against terrorism. “Why is it that the federal government could have wiretapped a potential mafia member’s phone, but not someone who could be involved in a terrorist group”. (-Senator Joe Biden). While the PATRIOT Act, and government surveillance in general, may be a controversial part of the legislation, the benefits it provides for the security of the United States makes it necessary in a world where terrorism has become commonplace.

It would be hard to image such an act which compromises privacy rights as much as the USA Patriot Act does were it not for the incredible threat another terrorist attack had on the United States. The search warrants spawned from this Act permitted the government to search your home or business, all without your consent or knowledge of the search. In some cases individuals subjected to them are not told about it until months after the search was performed. This Act also broadened the authority the FBI had to issue National Security Letters requesting information on American citizens. Using a much lower standard than under previous law, National Security Letters can compel third parties, such as banks and internet providers to secretly reveal your personal information at their request. Judicial approval is not required, the FBI needs only to certify that the information they requested is "relevant" to a investigation on terrorism. The USA Patriot Act also amended 18 USC. § 2339, to include "expert advice or assistance" as a prohibited form of "support" to terrorists. This is important because countries found to be advising terrorists, possibly Saudi Arabia, can potentially face charges on that behavior more easily than before when 18 USC. § 2339, only criminalizes giving "material support" to

The Patriot Act of 2001 was originally intended to protect citizens against further terrorism after the September 11 attacks. It was passed due to the overwhelming amount of support for the federal government from the public. This act made it easier for the government to attack the funding networks upon which terrorist organizations depended upon. The Patriot Act also encouraged various intelligence-gathering agencies, such as the CIA, and law-enforcement groups, like the FBI, to share information about suspected terrorists. Although some may argue that the Usa Patriot Act was beneficial in protecting the United States against further terrorism, the Usa Patriot Act was and still is, a restraint on constitutional rights. This act violates the Fourth Amendment, infringes on the First Amendment, and has been used by the federal government to abuse their power.

According to Los Angeles Times in 2009, the U.S.A Patriot Act, which is part of homeland security, allows the F.B.I to search records without warrants which breaks citizens’ right for privacy, the amendment that broke is the 4th amendment which is searches and seizures. From the Washington Blog in September 23rd, 2013, they stated the government is spying on us through our computers, phones, cars, buses, and the streets, also the security departments use scanners and drones to spy on us everywhere in airports as

1. Since the release of NSA’s classified documents by the NSA ex-contractor Edward Snowden, the controversy of morality and legitimacy of FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act), and, in particular, section 702, has become a major issue of public debate in the context of national security and privacy rights. To understand the underlying controversy, it is important to understand what powers section 702 gives to the US intelligence agencies. Section 702 of the Federal Intelligence and Surveillance Act (FISA) is the section that elaborates on the procedures and regulations for surveillance of non-United States persons while they are located outside the US. It defines US people as either citizens or permanent residence card (commonly known as green card) holders. Because determination of the person’s location can be hard (due to ambiguous borders in territorial agreements and ways to hide malefactors’ location), the law requires the targets to be only reasonably believed to be located overseas. Section 702 is flexible in terms of obtaining legal

FISA is an obsolete law that can't address terrorist attacks. FISA demonstrated un able to shield America from the 9/11 terrorist attacks, which were done with no evidence of prevention from FISA. It is crucial to consistently screen terrorist interchanges and the majority of their corresponding channels. Due to wiretapping numerous terrorists have been caught since 9/11, and our nation has been shielded from terrorists and any real assaults (Godoy). On the other side, are the people all for governmental wiretapping. These advocates trust the government must have the capacity to use any methods necessary to shield America from terrorism. They trust it is the president's occupation and obligation to ensure the interest and security of the general population of the nation. All things considered, the individuals who support wiretapping can take a gander at the issue of protection and be quiet with losing some of their securities for the greater good of the