There is a saying: “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” As long as there are people in the world with the intention to do harm, or crime, (which unfortunately is a great percent of mankind), there will be abuse and corruption. The Criminal Justice System was implemented to protect against such acts against citizens of the United States. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. The implementation of the U.S. Patriot Act in 2001 is an example of such massive abuse of power that has ultimately led to countless unjust arrests, unjust government surveillance on citizens, and most importantly it has stripped U.S. citizens of their civil liberties. The USA Patriot Act, as it is officially known, is an acronym for “Uniting and …show more content…
Moving forward, one of the highlighted key factors of the Patriot Act is the enhancing of the United State’s government surveillance. With the government access to such great personal information with the help of the Patriot Act, it makes citizens look guilty. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, (2017) between 2003 and 2006 (which is only 3 years), the FBI published 192,499 National Security Letters, in which led to 1 terrorist-related conviction, in which could have happened without the help of the US Patriot Act. Also between the TWO years from 2003 to 2005, the FBI made 53 reported criminal references to prosecutors as a result of 143,074 national security letters, in which 0 of all NSLs were about terrorism. (ACLU, 2017) And if that is not enough proof to convince the public that there is some kind of abuse, then the evidence of abuse of regular coherent citizens should surely sway the public opinion. The Patriot Act does not mandate information obtained by the NSLs to be thrown away, even if the information is determined to be from compliant citizens. This can even be seen in the scandal from Verizon in 2013, where a Guardian report disclosed a classified Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order instructing Verizon (which is one of the largest wireless telecommunications provider in the United States) to hand over phone records of millions of Americans to the NSA. (Domingo, 2013) According to the Washington Post, another secret program, named …show more content…
There is no easy way to say “let’s just get rid of the Patriot Act as a whole.” As it was described in the beginning, it is an acronym, swearing that the government will protect its citizens from terrorism. It is justifiable in a sense that after the attacks on 9/11, the government needed to take the offensive in the war against terror. It is not justifiable that after passing such anti-terror legislation, that the government abuses/and restricts the citizens of the United States of their constitutional rights. Most importantly, THE BILL OF RIGHTS. Congress as of early 2015 is becoming more and more aware of such unconstitutional tactics that agencies such as the FBI, or NSA are implementing on citizens, and deemed that the Patriot act needs to be reformed, even though it was only a little bit of a reformation. The House passed the USA Freedom Act which would attempt to restrain the nation’s surveillance state, while expanding other key parts that are supposed to expire by the end of 2015. (Miller, 2015) This means that the NSA would completely stop the programs mentioned by whistle blower Edward Snowden, and make NSA tactics more clear, and public for citizens to see. This was a little victory for the citizens who are burdened by the Patriot Act, but definitely something
The Patriot Act is one of today’s most controversial laws. The law’s official name is the USA PATRIOT Act, which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. The law was passed in 2001 after the September Eleventh terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. The act greatly increased the power of the government in preventing terrorism, but it also increased the amount of surveillance that the government performs on citizens.
For instance, the Act allows government interception of personal communication through wiretapping and other means. This enables the government to intercept communication among terrorism suspects. Law enforcers can also intercept personal communications of innocent citizens and non-citizens. However, patriot act supporters argue that electronic surveillance of people suspected to be a threat to national security has been in practice long before the patriot act. Secret hearings, warrants, and wiretapping have been around since 1978, based on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
In the same article it is said that, “Leon previously said the bulk collection of phone records is likely unconstitutional.” The problem of the NSA collecting phone data and storing the information continued to be a problem over a decade after the Act was signed into law. “In a May 2015 decision, a federal appellate court found the aforementioned program to be illegal under the PATRIOT Act… Collecting massive records in a database for some ‘hypothetical future time’ was not relevant under the statute” (Pike USA PATRIOT Act Still Raising Questions). The Patriot Act allows the government to ignore the constitution when it comes to imprisonment of suspected terrorists and allows the government to spy on its
According the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the most important and unconstitutional parts is in Section 215 of the act. It expanded ability for the government to gain access to third party records such as internet service providers and cell phone service providers. One of the most significant provisions of the Patriot Act makes it far easier for the authorities to gain access to records of citizens ' activities being held by a third party. This also would include forcing doctors, lawyers, anyone at all that has electronic communications records to turn such records over to the FBI when requested. Another concern raised by the ACLU is the provision’s violation of the 4th Amendment which allows investigates to conduct such searches without showing probable cause.
In 2007, a report by the Inspector General of the Justice Department stated they found “widespread and serious abuse of authority by the F.B.I under the Patriot Act” (Rosen, Jeffrey.). American citizens’ feared that the Patriot Act would be abused to search personal information like: emails, text messages, and phone calls. Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, presented a new bill that would correct Section 215. The senator’s “amendment would have required law enforcement officials to demonstrate that the records were connected to terrorism before seizing them” however, President Obama did not persist that this change be made before he re-authorized the Patriot Act (Rosen, Jeffrey.). Overall, Section 215 has been manipulated unlawfully compared to the constitution therefore; the Patriot Act should be
One group that argues this is the American Civil Liberties Union, which strongly disagrees with the Patriot Act. They have stated that investigations into the Patriot Act, “reveal thousands of violations of law,” (ACLU), while this is simply not true. One controversial piece of the Patriot Act are roving wiretaps. These allow government investigators to follow and put surveillance on certain people, rather than certain devices, so that they may save time and effort. According to Nathan Sales, a law professor at George Mason University, “Federal courts agree that Title III’s roving wiretaps authority is constitutional and… provides strong support for constitutionality,” (Sales).
In December 2005, the National Security Agency was accused of wiretapping into calls without having a warrant. The program was confirmed by President Bush and many other public officials who considered the taping legal. The American Civil Liberties Union pressed a lawsuit. ACLU states “A federal judge in Detroit found the program both unconstitutional and illegal.” Furthermore, the case was appealed and entered the U.S. Court of Appeals where the circuit overturned the ruling stating “the plaintiffs could not prove with certainty the NSA was wiretapping phones, but decided not to rule on the
I am in favor of the patriot ACT. I know many people think, it is kind of violation of the privacy, but the patriot ACT make the U.S. a better place to live. There are countries, which try to do some damage to the U.S., and they will do anything to accomplish it. The patriot ACT made it easier for the law enforcement whenever they needed to arrest someone, whether is a drug dealer, a terror organization or someone who tries to make some damages through technology. These acts can have huge impact on the people and the society, law enforcement should act faster than the enemies in order to get them before they get what they want.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act allows U.S. intelligence agencies to acquire foreign intelligence information by monitoring foreign persons in the USA and abroad. This act ensures that intelligence agencies can respond in time to terminate a security threat. The most important part of this act, the Section 702 forbids deliberate monitoring of US citizens and their communication. Technically NSA has been violating this act ever since it has been enacted in 2008 because, as we know, they have been monitoring all US citizenry.
“ No single provision of the Patriot Act has ever been found unconstitutional. This is a testament to the act’s limited applicability, procedural safeguards, and extensive oversight
“The Patriot Act broadly undermines the rights of all Americans. It reduces judicial oversight of a host of investigative measures, including wiretaps, expands the government 's ability to track individuals ' Internet use and gives federal officials expansive new powers that are in no way limited to investigating terrorist crimes. ( thenation) It authorizes an end run around the Fourth Amendment by allowing the government to conduct wiretaps and searches in criminal investigations, without probable cause of a crime, as long as the government claims that it also seeks to gather foreign intelligence--an authority that is particularly questionable in light of recent disclosures from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the FBI has
“At least 42 terrorist attacks aimed at the United States have been thwarted since 9/11” (Reality). The majority of people know about the tragedy that happened on September 11th, 2001, but not that many people know about what came to be after the event; the Patriot Act. This act is the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001” (Miller). The Patriot Act got put in place by the President and almost got a unanimous vote to pass it nearly ten days after. It was later used to take down many of the 42 attack plots.
The fourth amendment can be beneficial but, it can also to some U.S. citizens be invasion of privacy. The fourth amendment states “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,” some U.S. citizens believe that Law Enforcement, the Government and the NSA are violating the required guidelines of the Fourth Amendment. The NSA is conducted a mass U.S. surveillance not to believe specific individuals may be engaging in terrorist activity, but instead to believe all of us may be engaging in such activity. The government mass surveillance proves that U.S. citizens are considered suspects at all times. With the Patriot Act the NSA has access to
The fourth amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” To me, this means, in order for the American people to feel that they and their belongings are safe, only an official sworn into office can issue a warrant. This warrant can also be issued with probable cause, or reasonable belief, that some crime has been committed. Upon issuance of said warrant, the sworn official must specify exactly where police are allowed to search and the exact things or people they are allowed to look for and take in their investigation.
population about this policy are controversial and have been hot topics in the news ever since. Lastly, the fallout after 9/11 associating with the USA PATRIOT Act has brought Americans to become suspicious of their own government. They were completely unaware of the FBI’s database meant to spy on them and gather exceptionally personal information. The amount of focus people have placed upon their leaders has made the country more lawful and