Justice Against Sponsors Of Terrorism Act (JASTA)

Since the 9/11 attacks, concerns about the fine line between safety and privacy have arisen. It all began after the Patriot Act was enacted by the government to protect the safety of our country. One of its most controversial sections is section 215 which allows access to records and other tangible items under FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). Many Americans argue its right for the government to have access to certain personal information for the safety of the country. Others allege this goes against the fourth amendment of the constitution which states people are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. However, it does not protect against all searches and seizures, but only those that are thought unreasonable under the law.

Privacy is, and should continue to be, a fundamental dimension of living in a free, democratic society. Laws protect “government, credit, communications, education, bank, cable, video, motor vehicle, health, telecommunications, children’s and financial information; generally carve out exceptions for disclosure of personal information; and authorize the use of warrants, subpoenas, and court orders to obtain the information.” (Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Program Assessment, 2008) This is where a lot of people feel as though they have their privacy violated. Most Americans are law-abiding citizens who do not commit illegal acts against the country, they want to go about their lives, minding their own business and not having to worry about outside interference. The fine line between privacy and National Security may not be so fine in everyone’s mind. While it is the job of government agencies to ensure the overall safety of the country and those living in it, the citizens that obey the law and do not do anything illegal often wonder why they are subject to any kind of search, when they can clearly point out, through documentation, that they have never done anything wrong.

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.

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

With good intentions, the Patriot Act allows the government to pry into Americans' lives through computer and phone records as well as credit and banking history (Source 5). This oversteps the U.S. Constitution as the First and Fourth Amendment were created to give citizens freedom and the right to deny search and seizure

Although not every aspect of The USA PATRIOT ACT is radical, section 215 in The USA PATRIOT Act is one of the more critically addressed problems of this already controversial piece of legislation. Probably because most sane individuals would not like the government walking into a library or book store and ask for a list of anyone who purchased a book that may or not be considered radical enough to be flagged as possible terrorist activity. Summarized best by Dahlia Lithwick, “Section 215 modifies the rules on records searches. Post-Patriot Act, third-party holders of your financial, library, travel, video rental, phone, medical, church, synagogue, and mosque records can be searched without your knowledge or consent, providing the government says it's trying to protect against terrorism.” (Lithwick part 1) This raises concern that the government may cry wolf (terrorism) to circumvent the Bill of Rights for any investigation it so desired. John Ashcroft, as quoted by an unnamed CNN writer, said "If we ever make an inquiry about any kind of record or business record, it has the judicial supervision, so that a federal judge would look carefully and simply not allow it if it were not a part of a case that merited the involvement of the authorities." (CNN 1) It would seem that the term privacy never evolved alongside technology, allowing even greater

After the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001 the United States became a very different place. This drastic change was caused by the initial emotional reactions that American citizens, as well as government leaders had towards the tragic event. The government, in an effort to assure that these events never happen again passed the USA PATRIOT Act, which is an acronym that stands for the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. The major goal of this act is to combat terrorism by giving the government more leeway in what areas they are allowed to use their surveillance tools and also to what circumstances these tools can be used. The major issue that arise with this act are the fact that many of the act can be seen as unconstitutional.

The Patriot Act was established after the tragedy of September, 11, 2001 in a moment of weakness. It gave unprecedented and unnecessary powers to intelligence agencies under the wide umbrella of national security. The Patriot Act has used an “us vs them” mentality as well as pro-American propaganda to accomplish its goals. This new authority of the intelligence agencies has gone too far, is unjustified, unconstitutional, and infringes on the privacy of the American people, as well as others in the world. The Patriot Act should be weakened in order to preserve the rights of the American people and to reaffirm to the world that the U.S will not tolerate violations of human rights.

In today's society, you are always being watched. The USA PATRIOT Act wants it to stay that way. According to Chris Plante in, "A Short, Crucial Explanation of the USA PATRIOT Act and USA Freedom Act," the USA PATRIOT Act, or the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, creates an, "[...] expansion of government power pertaining to domestic surveillance, law enforcement, and border security." (The Verge). The USA PATRIOT Act allows increased spying on citizens in the United States in order to decrease crime and terrorism. The Patriot Act Poll Results via ISideWith tell a story of a lack of understanding about the USA PATRIOT Act, however, with approximately 55% of Americans supporting the act. However, despite the belief it is a well-regulated, necessary act, the USA PATRIOT Act must be repealed due to the abuses the act allows, the violations of citizens' rights, and the inefficiency of the act in preventing crime and terrorism.

Like most Americans, I have read in the news recently about the different intelligence agencies of our government, federal and local, gathering and storing personal information on its citizens under the direction of the Patriot Act. Some would consider the information gathered about our personal lives overly intrusive, including violations of our constitutional rights while others may not. However, I think most Americans will agree that the government needs to be very careful in how they interpret the amended Patriot Act. It should be interpreted in such a way that it does not violate the American people’s constitutional rights. If the laws do then they should be overturned. Today many

After the horrific terrorist attack on the date of September 11th, 2001 the U.S has passed a law to help prevent terrorist attacks. Through the use of tapping phone lines and checking citizens Internet usage. The U.S. department of Homeland Security’s purpose was to organize the National Security Agency, the Pentagon, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency. The design was intended to product the people of the U.S. It allows the government to search people’s home without a warrant. The causal factors that allow the government search through without warrant are: emails, phones and search engine searches. There is a problem the 4th amendment “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,

Moreover, the Patriot Act promotes information sharing among federal, state, and local agencies so that the process of information can be easier, which will hep increase the quality of intelligence products (Department of Justice, n.d.). The Patriot Act also allows federal agents to have a more active role in investigating cybercrimes that are usually carried out by terrorists and it also requires financial institution to report to federal authorities suspicious transactions that could be linked with money laundering as well as money counterfeit crimes (ACLU, 2017) (Congressional Digest, 2004). Although the Patriot Act helps reduce the risk of terrorist attacks and other crimes, it does have an impact on the privacy of law abiding citizens that have nothing to do with terrorism. For example, under the Patriot Act federal agents can easily

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

The Patriot Act, an act passed by Congress in 2001 that addressed the topic of privacy in terrorist or radical situations, is controversial in today's society. Although it helps with protection against terroristic events, The Patriot Act is not fair, nor is it constitutional, because it allows the government to intrude on citizens' privacy, it gives governmental individuals too much power, and because the act is invasive to the 4th amendment right. To further describe key points in the act, it states that it allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking, and it allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred.

While there are many benefits provided by the Patriot Act, the program also incorporates drawbacks, chiefly, American citizen’s freedom is being weakened. Corresponding, the Fourth Amendment is being taken advantage of; the protection to citizen’s privacy from government invasion, and no warrant shall be issued without probable cause (Wex Legal Dictionary). With this intention, subpoenas are often obtained rather than a warrant, and the use of technology to record citizen’s information is reducing the Fourth Amendment. Not only is the Fourth Amendment being weakened, but so is our freedom of speech. Moreover, the Patriot Act can easily be abused, crippling the Fourth Amendment, leaving Americans with less freedom than what was written for them