Should The Constitution Be Violated By Intelligence Services Like The NSA Essay

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.

It could be argued that the PATRIOT act is a step away from giving government agencies the legal power to disregard fundamental rights. Each document gives the government a little more lee-way. If the American people are not wary, the government will keep on bending the rules as far as they will

After the tragic events of 9/11, the government desperately needed to find a way to contradict terrorism. They approached this conflict by passing the Patriot Act in October 26, 2001, signed by President George W. Bush. This act widened the government’s authority to invade their citizens’ privacy, while reducing checks and balances like judicial oversight, public accountability, and the ability to challenge government searches in court. Even though the Patriot Act was purposely ratified to benefit our country from dangerous terrorists, some people quarreled and disapproved of it. In my perspective, I would have also disagreed on the Patriot Act.

On September 11, 2001 Al-Qaeda attacks the Twin Tower of the World Trade Center. In response to this attack, President George W. Bush administration increases their data capability. “A federal judge sitting on the secret surveillance, panel called the Fisa court would approve a bulk collection order for internet metadata every 90 days.” So does the NSA violate the 4th amendment? According to uscourts.gov “4th Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. The 4th Amendment, however, is not granted against all searches and seizures, but only those that are being unreasonable under the law.” On one hand, the 4th amendment and other hand you have the Patriot Act and now called the USA Freedom Act.

The Patriot Act, in my opinion, is violating the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution (even though it is an exception to it) because it invades our privacy by allowing the government to place wide ranging wiretaps on us without even identifying the target or locations of target individuals who have no connection to terrorist organizations and collect business records of all Americans without any connection to terrorists. Under the act, any data can be collected by the government without a warrant. They have access to the phone calls we make, the inbound and outbound internet traffic we navigate, and even the emails we receive/send in a daily basis. Basically, under this act, none of the electronic information that we consider private is untouchable

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.

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.

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.

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

When the colonist were drafting the constitution they couldn’t have imagined the tremendous growth we have achieved today. With innovation comes conflict. Many citizens feel the United States gives an illusion of freedom. Today the biggest conflicts are centered on basic rights spelled out in the constitution. It’s no secret the National Association of Surveillance illegally obtains information from the electronic devices of United States citizens. The actions of the NSA violate the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 9th amendment rights. The NSA’s use of information impedes on the first amendment in terms of freedom of press. For a journalist the source is the key, and the key stays confidential. With the NSA collecting digital trails there is a higher risk for whistle blowers to be charged with criminal act or even assassinated. The courts stand by the NSA, for

Congress ushered in the Patriot Act by arming law enforcement with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism by expanding federal officials’ powers to keep tabs on our personal information, from credit card use to cell phone calls to car travel. It allows investigators to use the tools that were

People who oppose the act ask this question “Does this act violate the Fourth Amendment? (The right giving us privacy as United States citizens). “There is an inherent opposition between governments’ requests for access to data in the context of criminal investigations, or the fight against drugs or terrorism, and the basic rights of individuals to privacy in their home or their papers.” (Gilbert 3). Basically to some up that statement there are certain times when the United States will use the act, almost like when the police get a warrant they pick the time that is best for them for their safety and our country as a whole. People who oppose this act also ask this question, is the Patriot Act just a way for the United States to listen to our lives as an excuse? What does the CIA or FBI listen for when using this law? “Contrary to press reports, the Patriot Act is not “the” U.S. law that governs the rules for access to data or communications by law enforcement and national security agencies.”(Gilbert 2). This means the U.S would have to have consent to use other countries databases for information on criminals and other activities, but this brings up a point, the United States wouldn’t give you a warning if they were watching your internet browsing or wiretapping your phone if they wanted your

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 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

According to the Constitution Rights Foundation, “On October 26, President George W. Bush signed the Patriot Act into law. He praised the ‘new tools to fight the present danger . . . a threat like no other our Nation has ever faced.’ He also asserted that the Patriot Act ‘upholds and respects the civil liberties guaranteed by our Constitution’” (The Patriot Act). Supporters of the Patriot Act will argue that ever since it was passed, it has helped prevent future terrorist attacks. They have also argued that the secrecy behind the Patriot Act helps to keep the terrorist organizations from knowing vital information that would be valuable to them. This is a valid point; as well trained terrorists