During times of conflict, the American government often sets limitations on civil liberties. For example, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War. Recently, after the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001, the government has been attempting to strengthen its control on the growing terrorism threat by increasing surveillance on the American people. Some people do not see this increase in security as a violation of their civil liberties. However, these restrictions infringe on rights specifically included in the Constitution and therefore are not admissible in relation to the “war on terror”. Many other periods of conflict demonstrate that restrictions on civil liberties hurt the people and the …show more content…
The Quasi War was an undeclared war between the United States and France from 1798 to 1800. Tensions between the U.S. and France began when the U.S. signed the Jay Treaty with Great Britain and refused to give the French Republic financial aid after the French Revolution. President Adams attempted to ease these tensions by sending American officials to negotiate an agreement with France. When the officials arrived, they were met by three French agents who demanded a bribe. This was known as the XYZ Affair. It severely increased anti-French sentiments and led to the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts. These acts made it easier to deport foreigners and prohibited anyone from speaking out against the government. As a newly freed nation, the government was vulnerable and felt that the only way to protect itself on the home front was to limit the rights of the people. Therefore, these acts evidently violate the right to free speech and the right to petition. Because of the nation’s fear and insecurity, the civil liberties of the American people were sullied during the Quasi
The Quasi-War had occured during John Adams’ presidency but it had everything to do with George Washington and his neutrality proclamation. When we had gone to war with Great Britain France supplied us with food and weapons so we owed them a debt of helping
In addition, this request caused the Americans to enter into an unofficial war with France known as the Quasi War. In this war, the Americans laid an embargo on all trade and allowed naval vessels to attack armed French ships that were capturing American vessels. This sudden need for ships caused many people to see the importance in the Federalist cause of having a strong central government with the power of raising an army (McCullough 241). Furthermore, this war jumpstarted the plans for building a navy, as congress authorized $1.4 million for the building of naval warships to protect the Americans (Wood 245). After roughly 2 years of fighting, both sides signed a treaty, the Treaty of Mortefontaine, ending the war and the Franco-American alliance.
As modern technology progresses, there is a chance the technology can be used to restrict basic freedom and civil rights. With the risk of losing important freedoms, we must fully understand the importance of new
“The Fourth Amendment says that you have an expectation of privacy in your home and person (body). The government cannot search you, your home, or belongings without a good reason.” (Background Essay). But, through the years the government has invaded the protection the Fourth Amendment has given to society. For example, “Federal agents put a bug- a device that allowed them to listen to the conversations” (Doc A).
The Alien and Sedition Act were enacted to make the United States more secure from foreign spies and domestic traitors (Defining America, n.d.), due to the result of the hostility between the United States and France (Outline, pg. 82). The Alien Act gave the President the authority to detain, imprison or expel aliens (immigrants) in the time of war or peace (Outline, pg. 82), which President Adams felt was needed because “foreign influence within the United States was dangerous and must be exterminated” (Alien and Sedition Act, n.d.). Moreover, the Sedition Act proscribed writing, speaking or publishing anything of false, scandalous and malicious in nature against the President or Congress (Outline, pg. 82). Although, both the Alien and Sedition
Oliver Wendell Holmes once wrote, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsly shouting in a theatre and causing panic.” Similarly, the Supreme Court’s ruling to arrest Schenck was wrong, and a U.S. citizen should be allowed to protest a war or draft in times of war. Specifically, the Espionage Act violated the first Amendment, Charles Schenck, whom was arrested after violating the Act, was indicting no violence, and the Act violated the 13th Amendment. First, citizens in the U.S. being allowed to protest wars or drafts specifically shines through since the Espionage Act violates the 13th Amendment.
Of the three acts, the Sedition Act was clearly the most harmful to the American people of the time by transgressing upon the constitutional rights of citizens by removing their freedom of the press, through inhibiting progress of America as a government through silencing the people, and by reverting the society back to a power construct similar to that of British rule by instating a jaundiced
This paper will discuss how to balance out civil liberties and security in intelligence activities; mainly surrounding the topic of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2002. With this topic and its perceived downfalls, identifying how to make both sides work efficiently will be discussed. Discussion When asked the question of “how can the United States balance civil liberties and security in intelligence activities?” the thought of the USA PATRIOT Act comes into mind; for two reasons. The first one is it caused a enormous uproar in the community after it was enacted based upon the fact it was perceived to infringe on civil liberties.
However, they must also remember that they swore to uphold the principles of the Constitution, which represents Franklin’s vision of “essential liberty.” The National Security Administration’s online surveillance of American citizens epitomizes a period during which “temporary safety” concerned politicians more than liberty. Just as the policy makers of Franklin’s time had to decide how to mitigate the threat of backcountry rebellions, modern Americans had to decide how to mitigate the
National Security and Violations of Civil Liberties National security has been a hot button topic issue for over a decade. After 9/11 President bush rolled out the Homeland Security Act and the USA PATRIOT Act. Part of the USA PATRIOT Act includes allowances for the NSA to surveil and collect data on American citizens. This issue gained notoriety and national attention when Edward Snowden came forward with information about how the NSA was collecting information from Verizon everyday on phone numbers in the U.S. and out.
In the short story “War Party” by Louis L 'Amour, a fictional woman named Ma travels across the country with her family to find a new home near the mountains in the western frontier. During the trip, her husband dies by an arrow to the lung which was shot by an Indian. In the mid-19 century, there was a law that if a woman’s husband dies while they are traveling on the Oregon Trail then the women would have to either remarry or head back to the eastern coast. Ma refused to remarry or go back to their old home. Ma was very independent and smart, but since she was a woman the people in her wagon train pressured her to go back.
This event aligns with the creation of The Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act made in 1918. The purpose of these laws was to forbid "spying and interfering with the draft but also "false statements" that might impede military success", as well as any ' 'statements intended to cast "contempt, scorn or disrepute" on the "form of government" or that advocated interference with the war effort" (Voices of Freedom 119). As a result, American citizens expressing their disapproval in any form regarding the war would be arrested and punished by these
The McCarran Act of 1950 restricted civil liberties for the sake of internal security. Both of these acts
At what point is war inescapable? While one could argue that there were several events that contributed to the colonists’ eventual declaration of independence from Britain, the carrying out of the Boston Tea Party by the colonists, and the subsequent passing of the Intolerable Acts by the British represent the point of no return. After these two events in 1773 to 1774, the rebellion was inevitable. When the colonies first formed, everyone was happy, but as time went on, British Parliament began to abuse their power. Each instance that this occurred, the colonists were pushed further and further, but yet never fought back.
Although civil liberties are often confused to be the freedom guaranteed to the citizens of the United States, in actuality, they are the restrictions made to our government in order to achieve the freedom desired by the people. In order to grasp a firmer understanding of what civil