Opinion: The power of the government's spy on individuals is constitutional because when the situation involves national security, the safety of the nation must be put first before the rights of individuals.
Background Information: In 2005, ACLU sued NSA for spying/wiretapping on the ACLU. A district court in Michigan ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, however circuit courts and other appellant courts declined to hear the case since not enough evidence is present to prove that the ACLU was being spied. The Supreme Court also declined to hear the case in 2008. New turn of events in NSA's policy, which gave more power to listen to international calls, prompted the ACLU to sue NSA again. (Amnesty v. Blair)
Arguments: In Schenck v US, the rights of Schenck was restricted because of a time of war. The government's priorities were in protecting the rights of the citizens, and during war time, Schenck's opposition to the draft could have threatened the security of the nation. In a similar sense, the protection of the US from foreign threat during wartime is necessary, and the most effective method is the wiretapping of individuals for the sake of national security. As promised by the NSA, if evidence of other crimes are obtained, they will not be used against the individuals, upholding Mapp v Ohio and a Constitutional right. So the NSA does not take away all of the rights of a citizen in a criminal trial.
Opposing views: The actions of NSA are violations of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution and the actions of NSA also give the president/executive power excess powers. The Constitution also states that the President has this authority by his executive power from Article II, Section 1. And if he needed any additional authority, the Authorization for Use of Military Force gives him the right to use intelligence-gathering methods.
ACLU attorney Ann Beeson argues their case against the NSA's right to wiretapping.
No comments:
Post a Comment