BIG DEBATE: ACLU v. NSA Steph

Should the Executive Branch be able to spy on Americans without a court warrant in order to try to prevent future terrorists attacks on the United States?

Who: National Security Agency vs. American Civil Liberties Union

What: The chief executive has allowed NSA to wiretap phone conversations and spy on email conversations without consent. ACLU has challenged this practice, calling it a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens from unwarranted search and seizure. However, NSA has countered that this is a necessary step towards catching terrorists; they argue that the nation's interests trump individual rights in this case.

When: This debate has first reached court in 2006, where ACLU had won against the government. However, this decision was overturned a year later. When asked by ACLU to reconsider this decision, the Supreme Court declined. In fact, Congress passed the FISA Amendments act in 2008, enabling NSA even more power to illegally search the conversations of citizens without their consent.

** FISA, also called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, gives guidelines for asking for judicial authorization of electronic communications and physical search of spies or terrorists against the U.S. for someone else**

I think the government has no right to have access to private conversations because this directly violates the 4th Amendment, the right against unwarranted search and seizure.

My Points:

Katz v. U.S. --4th amendment protects citizens and their conversations; police must obtain warrants to wiretap phones.

Mapp v. Ohio --Police cannot use evidence from unwarranted search and seizure in trials (Exclusionary Rule)

4th Amendment: 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.

The opposer's points:

-The 4th Amendment states that there must be a probable cause for the search.

-National Security trumps individual rights.