Usa Information Case Study

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.

Any individual has the right to obtain information stored about them at any given time.

given extra safeguards for sensitive information – e.g. ethnicity, political views, religion, health or criminal records

9. These conditions preserve the confidentiality of the communication or data, and the legal protections regarding the use and disclosure of privileged information, and thus such communications and data are private and confidential. Further, the U.S. Government shall take all reasonable measures to protect the content of captured/seized privileged communications and data to ensure they are appropriately protected.

These Adjudicative Guidelines are used to evaluate each applicant’s eligibility for access to classified or sensitive information and for Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) and are also used to guide adjudicators in evaluating information gathered during an applicant’s background investigation

In addition, the freedom to information by government authorities must not exceedingly surpass the rights and privileges that citizens enjoy (Re and Richard, pg. 1887).

The Privacy Protection Act of 1980 protects journalists from being required to turn over to law enforcement any work product and documentary materials, including sources before it is disseminated to the public. Journalists who most need the protection of

6. How does the Privacy Act differ from FOIA, and when would a taxpayer request information under the Privacy Act rather than under FOIA?

§552; a federal law; which makes information held by a government agency available to the public. Therefore, if the claimant plans on pursuing the lawsuit in District Court, when they receive their Right to Sue Letter; they should immediately request a copy of the FOIA File. Importantly, the FOIA File has information from the plaintiff and the employer; which was used by the EEOC investigator used to make their final decision. Equally, it contains information that the employer submitted to EEOC; which can be very beneficial in the lawsuit. Likewise, the claimant can request the FOIA File directly, on the EEOC website. If if send request via email submit a copy of dated the Right to Sue Letter. However, the turnaround time for the FOIA File is 20 working or business days; after the representative has received the request. Equally, the FOIA must be requested within 90 days. Therefore , if the request is made via email' attached copy of the Letter of Determination in PDF is attached to the email for date verification and to resolve any statue of limitation issues. If the receive the information isn't returned in a timely manner; r continue to email weekly and request the file. Moreover, the FOIA File is NOT free. A letter from your local FOIA Requester Service Center will inform you where or who to contact to purchase the file. Contact the Requester Service Center for questions and

The purport of the USA FREEDOM Act is to stop some of the most egregious transgressions of the National Security Administration by limiting the ability of the federal government to gather massive amounts of metadata on citizens pre-emptively, without probable cause. Instead, the federal government must seek search warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISC to access phone data. It also limits the ability of the federal government to do dragnet surveillance – in other words, to gather data on everyone in a certain city, state, or ZIP code. The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts must submit an annual report that indicates the data collected through certain types of orders.

* Loss of Confidentiality – Impact of unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information (e.g., Privacy Act).

CompTel a small subgroup part of AT&T distributor and competitor, filed a FOIA request with the Federal Communications Commission in 2005, the notion was to find documents related to the federal communication commission question, which was querying whether AT&T had cheated CompTel, by having overpriced goods in their work on a technological education project. AT&T denied having being involved with such matter and the FCC is refusing to release the documents. Their reasoning is that the production of the documents violated Exemption 7c of the FOIA, a law passed by congress. The main law was to exempt the disclosure of records that would result into an invasion of “personal privacy” of the new document holders. The Federal communications commission rejected AT&T's argument that stated that they receive the documents. However, in September of the year

Because of this, the ICE agent is not obligated to disclose the records that I am asking for, with exception to the first page of any of the related police reports, which always remains public. In conclusion, the agency would win in this battle of disclosure because they would claim that my reporting would interfere with their pending case and could likely result in potentially prejudicial pretrial publicity if the case went to court. On the other hand, while the Federal Freedom of Information Act helps citizens access records, which includes paper, film, tape, or any electronic communications, this sentiment does not apply to a person’s thoughts, therefore the ICE agent has no obligation to answer my questions since her thoughts are not a tangible

The main principle behind freedom of information legislation is that people have a right to know about the activities of public authorities.

The summary of the recent changes to the Freedom of Information Regulations is below. The rule has been changed pretty significantly. Every section has been rewritten, even when the content stayed mostly the same. Per your request, I tried to keep it pretty brief and only include substantial changes. Please let me know if you need any additional information or details.