Government Survaillance is unconstitutional and should not be conducted. It deprives citizens their right of liberty. Peolpe’s privacy should not be sacrificed for the sake of security.
Security concerns have often been used to justify a breach of citizens’ privacy. Law enforcement groups have created different measures such as the use of surveillance cameras including in many public places to monitor the activities of unsuspecting citizens. In the surveillance process, the agencies involved use high-tech machines. These devices are controlled from a private area and are mostly invisible to the public (Norris, 2010). The tools are made in such a way that they can record and send information that’s both audio and images. The advancement of technology has made surveillance the conventional method of detecting criminals, especially in developed countries.
The primary role of the United States government, just like any other government, is to protect the citizens from internal and external attacks. Americans value security and at times they are willing to give up their liberty for safety. With the increased number of terrorist’s attacks all over the world, the American government is highly depending on surveillance to minimize the number of these attacks. The government through inspection agencies such as NSA and FBI among others monitors communication of citizens and foreigners at times without their consent. This has raised the concern of Americans over their right to privacy. Most Americans feel that the government should use different means other than surveillance to protect them from terror attacks.
Government surveillance is against Amendment fourteen section one. The part condition that no state shall make or any law which shall abridge immunities or privileges of citizens of the United States. Government surveillance deprives liberty hence it is unconstitutional. The Fifth Amendment guarantees many rights for those accused of crimes. The amendment protects suspects from being persecuted by use of evidence recorded except land or naval cases. This is because records can be altered hence someone innocent can be made to suffer. The fourth amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches in their properties (U.S. Const. amends. IV, Vand XIV). The process of government surveillance in Americans data and communication violates this clause.
Reports of the NSA spying on citizens were first brought to the light back in 2005.The NSA was accused of interrupting phone calls and other internet communication media. PRISM is one of the programs used which allows the government to collect videos, pictures emails and other documents of the main internet companies with approved orders in the guise of Patriot Act.
Many Americans are indifferent whether government surveillance is constitutional or not. The monitoring program was started by NSA, National Security Agency, after the September 11 terrorist attack. The aim of monitoring was to protect people’s security. The NSA tracks, records and obtain information from phones calls, emails and another communication medium. The surveillance is not only done to America citizens but also to foreign leaders.
The NSA was formed established in 1952 by President Truman. The main aim of creating NSA was to defeat terrorists and their organizations locally and internationally. The government can spy and obtain people’s information without their permission. This issue is unconstitutional and has been of high concern to many Americans. Some see it as necessary for protection from terrorist attacks. Those people who support government surveillance argue that since the loss experienced after the September 11 terrorist attack, the NSA should be above everyone. That is people’s freedom, and privacy should be sacrificed for the sake of protection.
The majority of Americans though see government surveillance as unconstitutional. The primary objective of NSA surveillance was to protect people, but it has now interfered with their privacy too. Government surveillance is unconstitutional as it is against the fourth amendment. That is “The right of people to be secure shall not be violated.” The government surveillance exposes personal information and data to the public which makes people insecure. Unlike in other centuries when the internet was not popular, technology advancement has made government surveillance easier. A large population of Americans having smarts phones and being depended on to the internet, their information can be obtained easily and faster. The issues of national security and people’s privacy are both important. Therefore, the government should balance between the two. That is it should not spy on every call or email.
Government surveillance is against the fourth and fifth amendments. The fourth amendment states that “The right of people to be secure shall not be violated.” When the government spy citizens information it makes them insecure. That is when personal information is exposed one feels insecure. According to research done in 2014 by Pew Research Center, 54% of Americans disapprove the act of government spy on phones and internet data as part of anti-terrorism struggles. Most of them do not see the need of sacrificing their freedom and privacy for terrorism issues. The number of people who are against giving up their liberty and confidentiality for safety rose from 60% in 2004 to 74% in 2014.They argue that anti-terrorism policies have not gone far enough to protect them hence are not convinced by the government surveillance act.
The citizens want to control their personal information and data, but only a few feel like they can. They prefer that they are the ones who control the surveillance agencies for the safety of their information. 61% of Americans are opposed to the government monitor and monitoring their communication. On the contrary, the NSA agency are controlled by the government rather than the citizens who own the information. Only 6% of Americans are confident with the companies that keep their information privately and secure. The government surveillance has made most of the Americans to change their behaviors. Most Americans who are aware of the government surveillance programs have changed their behavior due to confusion on whose interest they serve. That is the citizens or the government.
The USA Patriot Act is among provisions of the constitution which seek to strengthen government surveillance. It was signed and incorporated into the American law by President G W. Bush sometime in the year 2001. The Act stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. The act got passed after the 911 terrorist attacks to strengthen security. The bill gives the government authority to spy citizens and other people without their consent. On May 2011, President Obama signed an extension of the Act known as the 2011 PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act. The Act had three provisions that were extended for four years, which were, carrying out surveillance, roving wiretaps, and business records search on people who were thought to be having some connection to terrorists.
Many people have not been comfortable with this act because it deprives them privacy and freedom. The expanded use of National Security Letters goes on to allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to search and access people data without court’s order. Some provisions in this Act could no longer be effected as from 1 June 2015 due to lack of approval by Congress. Section 215 of this Act had been amended and prevented NSA from continuing with a program of mass data collection from phones. The section provides that phones companies are to retain data and NSA can still get data from people of interest with Federal’s court permission. Since passage of the bill, it has faced many legal challenges which the federals courts have ruled some of the sections unconstitutional.
Edward Snowden came to the limelight after accusing the American government of hypocrisy in the way they handle public privacy. Labeled as a controversial man, he is a former NASA and CIA agent who made public the strategy that the government had put in place to use the electronic medium to monitor activities of its people. Quickly became a fugitive and had to go to exile in Russia. He also accused the U.S of tapping on Angela Merkel a German Chancellor. They were said to be spying on allied politicians to monitor their plans. The act was in itself described as a law to stop a person from expressing themselves although it was cited as a security issue. According to The Nation, attempts by the government to shut him up would be both politically and diplomatically wrong, and therefore, he continues to enjoy that freedom in what he calls the representation of the people from a person that has worked for the government and knew how it operates.
Many Americans are concerned about the personal privacy being violated. This is after Edward Snowden leaked surveillances conducted internationally and locally by the NSA without its consent. According to Snowden, many global surveillance programs ran by the NSA involve telecommunication firms and European governments. Snowden whose current location is not confirmed has been a hero, patriot to some people while others see him as a traitor. He is a hero to some as he made many people aware of how their personal information is secure. To some, particularly the National Security Agency, he is a traitor because of exposing its actions.
Although the some of the sections of the USA PATRIOT Acts have expired and others being ruled out as unconstitutional, government surveillance is still practiced. With the advancement of technology, the FBI is believed to access and control a large amount of data with owners not being aware. A report by Spencer Ackerman March 8, 2016, states that the FBI has quietly changed privacy rules for accessing data collected by NSA from Americans. This has made many Americans less confident with the aim and purpose of government surveillance. The act has contradiction regarding privacy of citizens. Some sections of the law protect citizens from being deprived their privacy. Other sections specifically section 215 enables government officials to obtain “any tangible things” including library records, health-care records and other documents and papers. The NSA and FBI continue to spy on citizens data without any federal’s court permission which is against section 215 of the Act.
The Federal Communication Act, which was established on 1934, provides that information wiretapping as legal and information gathered shouldn’t be leaked. In the case of Olmstead v. United States (1928), Supreme Court decided that evidence taken from wiretaps without judicial approval was allowable. The court did not violate the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment provides that No person shall be held to answer for any crime except on presentment a grand jury. The amendment gives an exception to some cases arising in the land or naval forces among others. The amendment discourages dependence of recorded or wiretapped evidence in prosecutions. Thus, the use of information collected in government surveillances to prosecute suspects is unconstitutional.
In the act of fighting terrorism, the government should not focus on one rule that surveillance. It should balance between surveillance and other rules. The government surveillance and National Security Services are essential in for national and international security. The surveillance agencies should work within the jurisdiction of the Constitution. In occasion of obtaining information of citizens, they should seek permission from federal courts. The phone company firms should not at any time give out information regarding an individual or a person unless a federal court directs it.
The federal courts should also rule fairly. That is they should not favor the state in their ruling as this will decrease people’s confidence to government surveillance. The government surveillance should be on the particular part of an individual’s or firm’s and not whole data. For the sake of intelligence, the government cannot involve citizens in controlling the NSA or other surveillance agencies. Though surveillance is unconstitutional, it is has helped to minimize cases of terror attacks in the United States of America and worldwide too. The citizens, therefore, should cooperate with the government during surveillance. There should be a balance between national security and privacy of personal information.
References
Boghosian, Heidi. 2013. Spying on Democracy: Government Surveillance, Corporate Power, and Public Resistance. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&A N=619698.
Cropf, Robert A., and Timothy C. Bagwell. 2016. Ethical Issues and Citizen Rights in the Era of Digital Government Surveillance. http://lib.myilibrary.com?id=895126.
Dimitrakopoulos, Dionyssis G. 2007. Individual rights and liberties under the U.S. Constitution the case law of the U.S. Supreme Court. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004157910.i-1118.
Dinan, S. (2013). Federal Judge says NSA Phone Program Violates the Fourth Amendment. The Washington Times. Retrieved from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/16/federal-judge-says-nsa-phone- program-violates-four/?page=all
Eyre, William. 2011. The Real ID Act: privacy and government surveillance. El Paso: LFB Scholarly Pub
Harding, Luke. 2014. The Snowden files: the inside story of the world's most wanted man. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&A N=738497.
Kostov, Martin. 2000. The right to privacy and secret government surveillance. Thesis (LL. M.), International Human Rights Law, Dept. of Law -- University of Essex, 2000.
Landau, Susan Eva. 2010. Surveillance or Security?: the risks posed by new wiretapping technologies. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Marcovici, Michael. 2013. The Surveillance Society The security vs. privacy debate. Norderstedt: Books on Demand.
McCutcheon, Chuck. 2013. Government surveillance: is government spying on Americans excessive?
NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Emergency Management after a Major Terror Attack, Frances Edwards, and F. Steinhäusler. 2007. NATO and terrorism: on scene : new challenges for first responders and civil protection. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, Published in cooperation with NATO Public Diplomacy Division.
Olmstead v. United States (1928)
Reuter, Dean, and John Yoo. 2011. Confronting Terror 9/11 and the future of American national security. New York: Encounter Books. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=769481.
Ruschmann, Paul, and Alan Marzilli. 2005. The war on terror. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&A N=223451.
Tushnet, Mark V., Mark A. Graber, and Sanford Levinson. 2015. The Oxford Handbook of the U.S. Constitution.
Whitaker, Reginald. 1999. The end of privacy: how total surveillance is becoming a reality. New York: New Press.
The U.S. Const.
