What Is Edward Snowden Unethical

Citizens do not always fully understand legislation before becoming angry at someone. Who better to point a finger at than their government (Zuckerman para 7)? Despite the actual legal terms on surveillance, innocent citizens feel that they have had their rights violated and wonder why the government needs their information if they have nothing to hide. The supreme court declared in the third party doctrine that “anyone turning over information to a third party, such as a bank or Internet service provider, has no right to object if that information is later shared with the government” (Timberg para 11). Whether they understand the law or not, most people feel that their information should not be unnecessarily subjected to the government without their voiced approval (Zuckerman para 6). “Quite simply, the administration could have done a much better job of explaining both the potential and the limits of data mining. It should have made it clear

The ethical issues involving Edward Snowden’s case encompass key issues of morality. Snowden’s actions are to be interpreted as right or wrong based on the circumstances and personal reasoning. The preceding interpretation is this case in every ethical quandary. Once these issues are assimilated to the affected parties we begin to understand the larger picture of morality and ethical reasoning in Snowden’s case.

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.

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

NSA infringes on the 1st and 4th Amendment rights. America was the safe zone: a lot of people came to the United States so that they would have the freedom to express who they are, what they believe, and their thoughts without punishment. Edward Snowden, NSA whistle blower, wasn’t allowed that freedom when he made it know what the NSA was doing with Verizon’s phone records. Snowden did break the law but he brought awareness of this dilemma to the average citizen, villain, and hero. In the end, it caused the NSA to change some policies but it doesn’t even make a difference because still the administration continues to collect data without a cause. Correction: the NSA uses surveillance to protect United States of America from terrorist, terrorism and terrorism related crimes… The agency’s interpretation: anyone and anything under the sun.

“After years of denial, much of which likely constituted perjury, officials of the National Security Agency (NSA) admitted to having conducted unwarranted surveillance of Americans, a violation of the protections against such searches provided by the Fourth Amendment.” "NSA Admits Directly Targeting Americans for Warrantless Surveillance." NSA Admits Directly Targeting Americans for Warrantless Surveillance. Web. 8 Apr. 2015. The NSA abuses their power by going to the extreme and spying on innocent citizens warrantless. It isn’t fair to the society. The NSA shouldn’t be able to view anyone’s personal information without a warrant. With or without a warrant, The NSA should still have certain rules that will create boundaries. President Obama and the National Security Chief stated that they do not monitor the communications of

I strongly believe that the Patriot Act is unconstitutional; hence, I would say the government is acting illegally. Further, the book notes that the NSA put gag orders on several companies to prevent them from sharing their policies and procedures. The book also notes that even after certain laws and court cases ruled wiretapping illegal, law enforcement still did it. In my opinion, government surveillance and intrusion into personal data with a warrant is neither legal nor ethical.

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

Court, many people think the surveillance programs are unconstitutional. They argue that it breaks the First and Fourth Amendments set in the constitution. The reasoning is that they are not protected against unreasonable search and seizure (Donohue). Critics contend that it is also an invasion of privacy in the lives of United States citizens and has shown little about preventing terrorist attacks (Brown). There have been arguments about freedom of speech and press in this case too. Google had filed a court petition saying that the gag order barring disclosure was a violation of its freedom of speech. Google had wanted to release the number of user accounts that were associated with the PRISM program because the reports about the program were misleading (Pepitone). In one case, Judge Richard Leon ruled the collection of phone records unconstitutional. He stated, “I cannot imagine a more ‘indiscriminate’ and ‘arbitrary invasion’ than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval.” (Mears and Perez). Even though it was ruled unconstitutional by Judge Leon, the surveillance programs are constitutional according to the U.S. Court.

The NSA’s program of collecting e-mail data is neither constitutional or legal. Though our Constitution does not extend its freedoms to those outside of the United States, the program still greatly affects the personal privacies of American citizens. A search warrant is needed to view any citizen’s e-mails, and from my knowledge and experiences, in order to obtain a valid search warrant from a judge, probable cause, and a strong certainty that evidence will be found in the area being searched, otherwise the warrant is invalid and cannot be issued; “searches are generally considered reasonable when…a judge issues a search warrant based on probable cause.” (2). This obstructs the rights every United States citizen is protected by under the Constitution.

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.

Many people have always wondered what the word ethics mean. To me ethics is the feeling of right and wrong. Many people have their own way of defining ethics and but this is what ethics mean to me. Ethics to other people might mean following the laws and some may say ethics is determined by what society is believed is right and wrong. For example Edward Snowden, a 30 year old man was born in North Carolina in 1983 (Edward snowden.biography, 2013, para. 1). Edward Snowden was a security guard that worked for the National Security Agency (NSA), after three months Edward Snowden started to collect NSA files and fled to Hong Kong and leaked the files. China started to print out report of the files that Edward Snowden has leaked to China

I have a very strong opinion on this issues. I believe that NSA does not have the legal rights to collect all digital data. This kind of behavior violates the fourth amendment which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant. The fact that NSA is allowed to collect all digital data is an example of bending the law when it’s inconvenient. Additionally, the fact that a Supreme Court ruling from 1960 was used to justify collecting all data is laughable. Ensuring the safety of citizens is the priority of NSA but that does not mean they have the right to ignore the constitution. That whole purpose of the constitution is to limit the power of the government. Yet by allowing NSA to collect digital date we lose our right to privacy,

The NSA fails to ensure citizens that the targets of the programs are in fact foreigners. NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden states “while NSA may be intending on targeting someone involved with a foreign government or that they suspect of terrorism, they collect everyone's phone data”(NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden). In other words, the NSA collects everyone's phone data, whether suspected of terrorism or not. The ACLU adds that the problem with the FISA act, an amendment signed into law by president bush in 2008 expanded government authority to monitor electronic communications, “permits the government to monitor people who aren’t even thought to be doing anything wrong” (Does the government actually understands the 4th amendment). The government cannot legally collect phone info/data on people without the issue of a warrant. Finally, Edward Snowden claims that he “could wiretap anyone even the president if intending to harm the U.S”(NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden).

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