Creating a law is a tricky thing. No matter what is decided upon someone will end up unhappy. Unlike most laws that are made, the Patriot Act is highly controversial and a double-edge sword. Some think it is to help keep our nation safer against future acts of terror. Others think it is a complete disregard of our constitutional rights. This program is by all measure a violation and neglect of every American individual’s civil liberties. The NSA surveillance program as authorized by section 215 of the Patriot act does violate Americans’ civil liberties and is incompatible with representative democracy because it violates a person’s freedom of speech, one’s right to worship freely, taking away our fourth amendment right and is violating …show more content…
Our freedom of speech is being taken away from us by this unconstitutional act. It is interfering with this civil liberty be causing us to censor what we say. This censoring of on our own is called a chilling on speech. This typically occurs when the average person is afraid of the consequences that could be hurled upon them for exercising their right of free speech. “The NSA and FBI also have been obtaining photographs, emails, documents, videos, and connection logs…This program, also top secret, is code-named PRISM and technically meant for spying on foreign targets” (Dickson). We should not have to be afraid and watch what we say when we clearly have to freedom and protection to say what we want, in good reason of course. Anti-Federalists fought for our civil liberties because they were afraid the government would be too strong. “They are listed primarily in the Bill of Rights, the ten amendments added to the US Constitution once the first 9 states ratified them in 1791” (Rivera, 2/25). This is a basic right that every American is entitled to. This government in no way, for any reason, should move in on and slowly take away these rights. This is not the only part of the first amendment that is being neglected. The freedom of religion for some is being impeded on. Religion is something that anyone should be able to express freely and without worry of persecution or consequence. The PRISM program searches through, “Church, synagogue, and mosque
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
Governments justify the limiting of rights as way to increase public safety. The justification for the Patriot Act was the prevention of terrorist attacks. While the reasoning for the Sedition Acts was the protection of American citizens from hysteria or panic during war. Even people wanting to limit the Second Amendment validate their claim by saying it will protect U.S. citizens and prevent mass shootings.
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
The position held by those who disagree with my view would believe that the Patriot Act is a complete and total violation of Americans rights. They would believe that this is a violation of the fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth amendments. The act allows the government to get around the Fourth Amendment by allowing them to track who visits which website, and read private emails. (Johnson) Specifically, critics say that this act makes it a lot easier for the federal government to many things, such as obtain information about people, and eavesdrop on telephone conversations. Soon after the Patriot Act was accepted, many people voiced their differing opinions of it. People in civil liberties groups believed that the act took too much freedom away from the people. They believed it violated the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th amendments. The 4th amendment states that searches and seizures can only take place
On September 11, 2001 the United States was attacked by a terrorist group on our own soil. On October 26, 2011 the US Government signed into law the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA Patriot Act). Only one and a half months after we were attacked physically by a terrorist group, our government decided that we would be better off with a lot less freedom in order to better protect America from terrorist attacks in the future. Although this seemed like an obvious need in 2001, now almost ten years later there is little evidence supporting a need for such an Act. The bottom line is that the Patriot Act allows the US
In the final analysis, I believe we have an obligation to preserve our Constitutional rights in their original form if not for ourselves then for future generations. I do not believe anyone’s rights, individually or collectively should be trampled on. As such, because the Patriot Act legislation centers on our Constitutional rights, it would be appropriate for us as a country
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This is the text of the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and in forty-five short words it has protected, will protect, and protects the basic freedoms of American citizens for years. They represent everything the American Revolution was fought for. Even if the founders were a bunch of petty, hypocritical white men who had the wrong ideas about most things (read: slavery, women's rights, LGBTQ rights, fashion, and more) , they did something right when they wrote this. The first amendment guarantees a true government by the people. If the citizens believe the government to be wrong, we have the right to change it, the right to speak out against it, and the right to use the press in favor or against the cause. However, it's doing more than just protecting public participation in the government. It's protecting
After the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, a controversial piece of legislation was adopted and passed called the U.S.A. Patriot Act. The title for this bill is an acronym for "the United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" (USA Patriot Act).
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 terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 devastated the United States people. As they mourned over the deaths caused by the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City, Americans began looking for a way to prevent anything like this from happening again. Consequently, an act known as the USA PATRIOT act was passed by Congress. This act opened up many doors previously closed to law enforcement and intelligence agencies. With these new opportunities available to them, they have the capability to obtain information about specific individuals believed to be involved in terrorist activities and organizations. Very beneficial to the United States, the Patriot Act provides easier access for different government law enforcement agencies to share information, allows government agencies investigative tools that non-terrorist crimes already use, and helps to dismantle the terrorist financial network. Although many people claim that the Patriot Act violates the United States Constitution and the freedoms of the American people, it contains many elaborate safeguards to fight against such abuse.
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
Ever since the Bush Administration and the events of September 11, 2001, the American people have dealt with the government taking away bits and bits of their constitutional rights. Such rights like the freedom of association, speech, unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to legal representation, speedy and public trial, and the right to liberty. Any new law that infringes on these rights ands is created and passed is a bit of freedom being taken away. The government has limited individuals’ right to freedom of assembly by authorities seeking to repress the activities of those that are simply defending human rights. Censorship has also limited
The Patriot Act (Title II, Sec. 213) allows for the delayed notification of the execution of a search warrant. Under what circumstances can the notification be delayed?
“Don’t cling to things, because everything is impermanent” (Albom 103). Everything in life is temporary. Nothing in life is permanent.. In the story Tuesdays with Morrie, Morrie is dying from ALS. He is changing the way he lives his life and is teaching it to others. He is explaining to Mitch that he and others should not be too attached to things because they are not permanent. Morrie teaches people to live life through grieving if needed, accepting death and forgiving oneself and others.
Advise and provide guidance to students experiencing stressors, disabilities, family issues, or other special needs in the classroom