Search Warrant

With new found ways of viewing American citizens personal information the federal government had to learn how not to get caught. American citizens have right to their privacy and with all the new Domestic Surveillance programs many were warrantless. In 2002 Bush signed a presidential order allowing the National Security Agency to monitor without a warrant. This presidential order applied to international telephone calls and e-mail messages of thousands of citizens and legal residents inside the United States. This program never had the requirements to obtain or produce a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court but, as the 4th Amendment to the Constitution

Protecting American citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures is the central idea of the Fourth Amendment; however, the Fourth Amendment may also apply to electronics. Classified organizations, such as, the NSA secretly collect information that includes, details of phone calls, e-mails, and personal Internet activity, although, in 2013 the NSA’s secret was revealed to the public, since it was not publicly known that the NSA had been collecting bulk phone data. The NSA later tried to defend itself and state that it doesn’t mean that they collect all personal records, such as, medical records and library records. In order for the NSA to legally store phone data the agency must first receive a warrant from the FISA Court each time it wants

When it comes to Search and Seizure, allot of people think that law enforcement should not be allowed to search or seize property. I have heard many arguments against this subject, people stating that law enforcement officers go too far or have no right to search someone’s property such as their vehicle. Probable cause is more than a reasonable suspicion it requires that a combination of facts makes it more likely than not that items sought are where police believe them to be. In addition to establishing probable cause for a search, a warrant must contain the reasons for obtaining it, the names of people presenting the affidavits, what is specifically being sought and the signature of the judge issuing it.

A police officer is dispatched to a call in his jurisdiction for a noise complaint. The police officer arrives hearing very loud music coming from the residence which violates a noise ordinance. The police officer knocks on the front door with no answer so he proceeds to the back door to knock when he observes what appears to be marijuana plants based on his training and experience. The police officer can seize the marijuana plants based on the Plain View Doctrine. “In Harris v. United States (1968), the Supreme Court ruled that anything a police officer sees in plain view, when the officer has a right to be where he or she is, is not the product of a search and is therefore admissible as evidence.” [1] The

Whether it is calling someone on your phone or online shopping on the computer, people are more connected than ever to the internet. However, a person might be oblivious to the fact that they are being watched using these technologies. The NSA (National Security Agency) is an intelligence organization for the U.S. to protect information systems and foreign intelligence information. Recently the NSA has been accused of invading personal privacy through web encryption, tracking, and using personal information for their own uses and without permission. The surveillance of the NSA produces unlawful invasion of privacy causing an unsecure nation.

Unreasonable, warrantless searches and seizures should not take place because it violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, by not being justified by law. The NSA goes to the FISA court to get the kind of warrant needed for going through metadata, if the warrant is issued, then the NSA may go through the metadata. When the NSA goes to the FISA court, it means that the surveillance requires judicial oversight. Also, If the “intelligence committee” wants to listen to a phone call, then they have to take special measures such as a federal judge. The intelligence committee may not just listen to a phone call, all that the intelligence committee can do without taking special measures is look at the length of a phone call. Warrantless

The United States government’s interpretation of the Fourth Amendment has caused them to believe they are justified in amassing a collection of American phone records, which creates a breach in many American citizens’ privacy. According to the FISA Amendment Act, the government has the authority to “target foreigners abroad” (ACLU) and the phone records of any communications between Americans and those foreign targets can be collected. However, this act does not allow amassing

I believe that the government has good reasoning to want to go through our phone conversations and e-mails, but that doesn’t make it right. The fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets out requirements for search warrants based on probable cause as determined by a neutral judge or magistrate. This means that they can’t just go against the United States Bill of Rights and dig through people’s electronic devices. Part of the first amendment states you have the freedom of speech. If you have freedom of speech and the government is watching and listening to your conversations and you accidentally say something that sounds like terrorism but you happen to be joking, they can arrest you because they are suspicious. Both

We use technology every day, all day, for pretty much everything we do. Any information about ourselves, messages we send, or phone calls we make, it all takes place on our phones. However, they are also the biggest risk to our personal security as they are very vulnerable. They are not just vulnerable to scammers and hackers but also to our own government. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the president at the time, George Bush, responded by passing an act. This act is known as the Patriot Act. It allows the government unlimited access to phone records, emails, and text messages without a warrant through National Security Letters and Sneak and Peak Searches. Why do they do this, why was this act passed, they claim it’s for our safety. Both can be obtained and carried out without a judge’s approval, without a warrant, and without the knowledge of the person who is being searched. The Fourth Amendment is the right of the citizens to legal and just searches, with a warrant, with probable cause. These are not required under the Patriot Act to search through call histories and messages. The Patriot Act clearly infringes on the Fourth Amendment and the rights of the everyday citizen and does not accomplish its original goal of stopping terrorism.

Until now, many people argued that searching of historical cell phone records affects people’s privacy, but some other argue that the fourth amendment gives extreme protection for people’s privacy and it puts the country’s safety at risk. In general, it’s obvious that the fourth amendment gives extreme privacy to people since searching for the call history of a person to find just the location and time of call of a person without getting deep into its contents doesn’t touch the privacy of a person but at the same time gives an important information for

If the NSA were to get a warrant for every single phone call, email, text etc. that they want to go through, to follow the Fourth Amendment, it would take a very long time. Waiting for a warrant slows down the process of catching a suspect, and it can also be blamed for losing new, critical evidence. The NSA has to go to the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) in order to get a warrant which may take some time says David Sirota writer from International Business Times. (Source 1). Both the NSA and the FISA have to make sure that the warrant has a probable cause, and that it obeys the Fourth Amendment (Source 1). It also must be supported by a statement or some other visible fact or evidence, states the Fourth Amendment (Source

Without a warrant, searching through a person’s intimate records is considered illegal and unconstitutional according to the U.S Fourth Amendment. However, these infractions are still being committed today, some are even being committed by the U.S government. When the government agreed upon the Patriot Act, after the law was signed, confidential agencies were formed, such as, the NSA. The NSA was assembled by the government to collect and store data secretly, this information is received from popular internet companies and phone companies. The NSA derives information from a total of nine American Internet companies, and tracks millions of Americans using data from Verizon, AT&T, and BellSouth. By court order, Verizon is forced to provide

To begin, government spying creates potential risks to public trust, personal privacy, and civil liberty, which is why dometic programs that allows bulk data to be stored should be put to an end. With the Patriot coming to an end, the senate voted to end NSA’s bulk data collection programs to end on may 13. “[T]he House overwhelmingly passed the USA Freedom Act by a vote of 338-88 . The bill would take the storage of bulk telephony metadata away from the government and would instead rely on the telecom

Americans have the right to know what personal information of theirs is being monitored by the government and if the government is operating in a constitutional manner. Although the top priority of government should be to protect Americans from international threats, it must do so without infringing on basic human rights. I believe that the Supreme Court rulings and laws regarding privacy are a good balance of protection and respect to privacy. However, government agencies such as the NSA have certainly overstepped their ground in many cases and abused clauses within the

The new acts state that the NSA may not listen in to phone calls, or read emails, where United States citizens are involved, without the suspicion of them currently residing outside of the United States. However, the new acts require no individualized warrants when any situation that the NSA screens involves, or may involve a person, whether United States citizen or not, who they suspect to have been outside of the United States or currently outside of the United States. As Jack Balkin, professor at Yale Law School states, “The Fisa Amendments Act of 2008, effectively gives the President authority to run surveillance programs similar to the warrantless surveillance program (secretly implemented by George Bush in late 2001).” And if you still don’t believe that these government programs could be violating the rights given to you by the fourth amendment then look at the response that was published when senators began asking the NSA exactly how many Americans were having their phone calls or emails screened without individualized warrants, “the implication that NSA 's collection is arbitrary and unconstrained is false. NSA 's activities are focused and specifically deployed against - and only against - legitimate foreign intelligence targets in response to requirements that our leaders need for information necessary to protect our nation and its interest” (NSA). This statement was published a month before President Obama announced in his