Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows the United States government to gather foreign intelligence information concerning persons located outside of the country that are, or are connected to, a potential threat against the nation. In addition to protecting national security, the communications data collected under Section 702 has been used for criminal prosecution in domestic court cases. Since it passed in 2008, scholars have raised questions over the act’s constitutionality, especially about its consistence with the Fourth Amendment which protects both US and non-US persons against unreasonable searches and seizures. These scholars argue that not all communications gathered under Section 702 meet the reasonableness requirement of the Fourth Amendment and should therefore not be used in criminal cases. However, Section 702 mainly conflicts with the Constitution only when the act is used inappropriately by agencies to investigate people residing within the US rather than for its intended purpose of gathering foreign intelligence.
They mention the agency’s new wiretapping program and the constant suspicion that the agency is hiding something. The “FBI Encyclopedia” and “NSA wiretapping program” explains the suspicion on the NSA since World War II to the present day twenty- first century, while “Rep. Ellison Statement on Allegations of NSA Spying on Muslim-Americans” talks about how the NSA spies on Muslim-Americans when there was no wrong doing. This article uses the position of other nations/ races and how they are affected through these programs. However, all three articles come to a conclusion to make points about the National Security Agency being sneaky with something and their actions going beyond their
Although the monitoring of suspected terrorists was the original intention, the power hungry intelligence agencies of
The NSA’s surveillance of American citizens caused a debate over whether or not the Fourth Amendment of the constitution was being violated. The NSA, and the Fourth Amendment have been a touchy subject for some American citizens. The NSA, or National Surveillance Agency, is being closely watched by American citizens since a debate has formed as to whether or not the actions of the NSA regarding the surveillance of American
The author of, You decide: Current Debates in Criminal Justice asks, “Is the Patriot Act a Necessary Protection Against Terrorism or a Threat to Our Civil Liberties?” (Waller) Proponents of the Patriot Act have claim that the law is a necessary protection against terrorism. In contrast, opponents of the Patriot Act claim that it is a violation of Americans’ civil liberties. Both sides of the argument have debated valid points for and against the Patriot Act. The, U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is an acronym that stands for, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.
Homeland security legal and ethical issues refer to the complex and nuanced challenges that arise when balancing the need to protect national security with the protection of individual rights and freedoms. These issues can include questions related to surveillance, privacy, civil liberties, and the use of military force, among others. They also include the ethical considerations that must be considered when making decisions about national security policies, such as the use of drones and targeted killings, the treatment of prisoners and detainees, and the handling of classified information. Addressing these legal and ethical issues requires a deep understanding of the law and the ability to navigate complex ethical dilemmas, as well as a commitment
In 2008, President Bush signed into law The FISA Amendment Act, an act which allowed the government to monitor Americans’ electronic devices. Bush claimed that this Act could help save lives, as mentioned before, but what he did not mention is that this allows the government to conduct surveillance without probable cause. (“How the NSA’s Surveillance Procedures Threaten Americans’ Privacy.”) When people heard about this, they became concerned, and many began to question if the NSA would abuse this power.
Furthermore, the disclosure disaffirms the authenticity and credibility of government officials’ testimony. While a few months ago the director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, denied that the NSA collects any type of data, General Alexander, the director of the NSA, also rejected that the agency could intercept online communications (Cassidy “Why Edward” par.10). After comparing Clapper and Alexander to Snowden, Cassidy argues that Clapper and Alexander should face charges of misleading Congress. The falsity of officials’ statement distinguishes Snowden as “a man of conscience”, who should be excused and hailed as a hero (Cassidy “Why Edward” par.12).
The National Security Act (NSA) 1947 is the major component of the legislation in the history of America. It established majority of the U.S. national security and bureaucracy institutions consisting of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Air Force, and the Council of National Security. It led to the creation of National Military Establishment which became the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1949. It also provided the statutory identity to the Joints Chief of Staff of the U.S. Since the NSA, no comparable law has been passed. This legislation was the result of a set of unique circumstances (McDougall, 1997).
The NSA: Is the Fourth Amendment being ignored? Ahmed Sheikhahmed POL 328: Constitutional Law I December 12 2014 Initially, Americans believed that the National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance program had noble intentions, which would protect them from external threats and aggression in the form of terrorism. In the wake of the September 11th attacks, security agencies needed to have the ability to intercept communication between ‘terrorists’; however, Edward J. Snowden, a former NSA contractor, leaked several documents that provided evidence that the NSA surveillance program was going over and above its mandate.
In 2013, Obama claimed that at least 50 threats were prevented with NSA’s information, thus saving many lives. However, according to a study conducted by New America, the NSA’s proclaimed role in keeping the United States safe from terrorism shows Obama’s claims are and misleading: it was suggested that the NSA has played a role that contributes to domestic attacks in at most, 1.8% of the cases among all terrorist attacks in the United States. This research further proves that the United States is able to remain safe from domestic attacks without the existence of NSA. Moreover, according to the Intercept, the estimated 1.8 percent that NSA contributed to anti-terrorism attacks were overly optimistic, and states that the organization wasn’t able to present any valuable information to prevent any domestic attacks, after and even before Snowden’s
The work of the NSA and prism is what this symbolizes.
Civil liberties are rights guaranteed to citizens in the Constitution that the government cannot interfere with, however, in the name of national security, they do. The government sometimes finds it necessary for Americans to give up some of their basic rights to keep the nation protected, but many people find this unnecessary. A law-abiding citizen’s extremely personal information should not be essential to finding terroristic threats within this society. Under no circumstances should an American citizen’s civil liberties be violated in a time of war or crisis, because those are assured rights that are most valuable to their freedom during national conflicts.
The main issue in the Snowden controversy is the conflicting rights of private individuals and the US government with regard to the use of telecommunications and the internet. There are ethical issues surrounding this controversy and the most applicable ethical approach for this case is “Ethics by Rights Approach”. As a background, the reason why US government had declared Edward Snowden a traitor is his involvement in the leaking of about 1.7 million confidential US documents, 15,000 Australian intelligence files and 58,000 British intelligence files from the National Security Agency (or NSA) to the public. These confidential information were acquired by the NSA through the PRISM program by collaborating with big internet companies such
Many advocate government supervision because they believe that it will ensure National Security. Others strongly oppose this preferring to have personal privacy. Espionage has been beneficial in the past and has potential to be helpful in the future but when misused, it becomes more of a hazard. The freedom of speech also should not be sacrificed in the name of National Security. In addition, there should be limit on the kind of information the government receives and the manner in which it receives it.
