Recent controversy has exposed one of the most heated and long-standing debates about the National Security Agency’s (NSA) warrantless wiretapping. Although that beginning of the program conducted by the NSA is unknown, it is easily assumed that the NSA has been practicing such surveillance activities for a long time, or as long as national security has been threatened. Nevertheless, the program started well before the tragic events that unfolded on September 11, 2001, with the Bush administration directing the NSA to begin secretly surveilling conversations between U.S. citizens and suspected foreign terrorists. Post September 11, 2001, the United States learned that the Bush administration repeatedly authorized the NSA to monitor phones calls and electronic-mail (email) of people within the United States who were suspected of terrorist activities within the homeland. The monitoring activities were conducted without a warrant and in violation of the U.S. Constitution. The program became more of a topic after the September 11th attacks, and was part of a broad pattern of the executive branch using “national security” as an excuse for encroaching on the privacy rights of Americans with minimum to no oversight. In 2006, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was victories in the first of many rounds of litigation in the ACLU v. NSA case. The U.S. District Court ruled that the NSA program violated First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, and the Foreign Intelligence
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 threat of terrorism creates a fear that allows government agencies to subvert the United States Constitution and common morals out of the threat that they will be unable to combat terrorism without performing these rights violations. After the attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. on September 11th, 2001, the United States Congress passed the USA PATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Act (“NSA Surveillance Programs”). This act essentially gives a blank check of domestic and foreign rights violations to the federal government, specifically the National Security Agency, as long as the violation is done in the name of fighting terrorism. Reports came out numerous times over the next decade, specifically December 2005, May 2006, and March 2012, detailing how the National Security Agency was able to stretch its powers, even beyond this liberal and controversial bill, to surveil its citizens’ private phone conversations with neither warrants nor provable suspicion of a crime taking or about to take place (“NSA Surveillance Programs”). The former of these reports was by the New York Times, which had known for nearly a year about this program but
Today, electronic surveillance remains one of the most effective tools the United States has to protect against foreign powers and groups seeking to inflict harm on the nation, but it does not go without a few possessing a few negative aspects either. Electronic surveillance of foreign intelligence has likely saved the lives of many innocent people through prevention of potential acts of aggression towards the United States. There are many pros to the actions authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) pertaining to electronic surveillance, but there are also cons. Looking at both the pros and cons of electronic surveillance is important in understanding the overall effectiveness of FISA. [1]
Since the passing of FISA came after a widespread finding of warrantless wiretapping by a number of different government entities, Congress along with the Carter administration, needed to carefully craft a bill that not only reconciled national security needs to conduct domestic surveillance, but also continued to protect individual liberties such as that of the first and fourth amendments. The once top-secret Carter administration memos regarding FISA offer a first-hand glimpse at the thinking that went into
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
National Security Agency (NSA) regulations and tactics’ is an invasion of privacy, an infringement on the Constitutional Amendments, and fails to keep the private or confidential data of Americans safe from hackers.
Over the past few years, government surveillance in the United States has become a widely debated issue with two completely different sides. The National Security Agency, a government agency known for it’s efforts in spying and surveillance, has been at the center of this issue since it’s founding in the 1950’s. The Cold War had just begun and the United States government was doing anything they could to find potential terrorists and communists. In fact, many famous people including Einstein were being spied on by the government to find citizens with potential ties to the Soviet Union. (New York Times - New Details Emerge from the Einstein Files; How the FBI Tracked His Phone Calls and His Trash) As the cold war came to an end in the early 90’s, NSA spying seemed to come to an end as well.
Under the Bush Administration, the Protect America Act was passed in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001. As a result, in 2007, the National Security Agency designed and operated a surveillance program called ‘Prism’. The programs’ intent is to gather web communications from major United States internet corporations. Under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, Prism collects suspicious stored web communication and further employs communication companies such as, Verizon, to turn over all data that included court-approved terms, that indicated conspiracies targeted to compromise our national security. ("NSA PRISM Slides - IC OFF THE RECORD," 2013). Now, you may feel conflicted about their approach to securing our safety, but some are certain that this is undoubtedly a breech in our civil liberties. Lee (2013), states, “Civil liberties groups warned that the PAA 's vague requirements and lack of oversight would give the government a green light to seek indiscriminate access to the private communications of Americans. They predicted that the government would claim that they needed unfettered access to domestic communications to be sure they had gotten all relevant information about suspected terrorists.” Imagine we have a government that justifies spying on its citizens without any legal authorization to do so. The exploit our trust by suggesting that they
The Patriot Act was introduced as a response to the terrorist attacks in the US on September 11th. It has radically changed the way in which the government operates in the investigations of people in and out of our country. It has broadened the powers of the federal government in the way in which they can obtain information on people. In this paper I will be discussing the ethical and moral issues of the expanded ability of wiretapping, search and seizure, the establishment of the FISA court, and end with the transparency of these practices.
The tragic events of September 11th, 2001 showed the vulnerabilities of this country as a whole, reflecting the lack of attention this nation gave to terrorism. Following September 11th, it was clear that drastic preventative measures needed to be taken in order to avoid reoccurrence of a destructive and deadly act of terrorism (Simon, 2009). As a response to the attacks, The Patriot Act was passed in October of 2001 in order to give federal agencies a substantial increase in power in accessing, monitoring, and examining records and citizens who have been identified as, or could potentially be, risks to this country. This act also allowed federal agents to single out and watch potential individuals labeled as terrorists without evidence linking them to an actual terrorist organization, as well as allowing for an increase in wiretapping phones of potential suspects (Banks, 2010).
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 NSA has been secretly ordered to eavesdrop by the Bush administration after the 9/11 terrorist attack. The base of where the NSA has been operating their wiretapping agenda is in Bluff Dale, Utah the building sprawls 1,500,000 square feet and possess the capacity to hold as much as five zeta bytes of data it has cost almost $2,000,000,000. The act of spying over the USA citizens even though they are suspicious is a threat to the people’s privacy and the privacy of other countries’ members are being infringed on by the NSA by the act of wiretapping. The action of wiretapping violates laws for privacy, like the Bill of Right’s Amendment Four which says “Every subject has a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches, and
The integrity of one’s communications and privacy of online activities is the largest casualty of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance over digital lives. Years since September 11, 2009, the NSA’s mass surveillance has greatly expanded due to the heightened concern that new technology can be used by terrorists to plan and execute a terrorist attack. In today’s age of technology, there are easier ways of accessing information and communication as well as new ways of hacking and gathering personal information. The new surveillance programs and regulations are enabled by the Patriot Act and post 9/11 paranoia, but it has been over fourteen years since the incident. After whistleblower, Edward Snowden, it was revealed that the government’s mass surveillance went beyond what many considered acceptable. It can be predicted that unless the U.S Government reins in NSA mass surveillance, the
Under George W. Bush’s term, and shortly after the attacks of September 11th 2001, both the President’s Surveillance Program and the Terrorist Surveillance Program have been brought under scrutiny. Each of the programs authorizes the National Security Agency (NSA) by executive order to monitor phone calls,
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.