Fourth Amendment Pros And Cons

Billy is on the phone with Bob while they are talking on the phone and someone coughs and it is neither of them. Well, the government are the only ones who can hack phones and listen to phone calls, the 4th amendment has allowed this to happen. The 4th amendment has gavin the right to law enforcement to be cruel and unfair about a search and seizure. Without a warrant you cannot search a person, well not anymore, the government can search anyone at any time in some scenarios. Normally, there is an abundant amount of evidence used to be given the permission to search one’s belongings, but since 9/11 law enforcement needs little evidence to be provided a search warrant.

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.

“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 opposition suggests that the USA Patriot Act grinds down several elements in the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment, the freedom of speech and assembly, is violated because it restricts our speech, albeit, indirectly but it is still restricted. People are losing the right to say what they feel and they have to be careful with their words when discussing politics or the government because they can be prosecuted for saying what they think. The Fourth Amendment, the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, is violated because the Patriot Act does not require a probable cause or a warrant to search through someone's data and personal information and with the Patriot Act, the victim does not need to be informed this search is happening.

Moreover, it is being done without probable cause, which is not legal. The act also allows law enforcement officials to violate individuals and their Fourth Amendment protections, those being search and secure laws. According to source one, the act is debated to be infringing on basic American civil liberties. The second source also enlightens that the NSA and FBI can collect phone records of people who have not been suspected or accused of a crime. All of these activities that are being done, violate several rights of the American citizen and can potentially get innocent people into trouble.

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).

Over the years following 9/11, facts about the secret surveillance program started to surface. As an investigation started being conducted, it was found that the program was not just listening in on calls and emails from abroad by quite of bit of activity monitoring was taking place within the United States causing a lot of controversy in the fact that people did not like the idea that their private information was being invaded by the NSA on authority of the president. Furthermore, there was a rise in concern for the Fourth Amendment rights against search and seizure violations of having individual’s emails taken and used against them without warrants. The Bush Administration worked with Congress immediately following the 9/11 attacks to pass and sign into law the USA Patriot Act that was “an overnight revision of the nation 's surveillance laws that vastly expanded the government 's authority to spy on its own citizens, while simultaneously reducing checks and balances on those powers like judicial oversight, public accountability, and the ability to challenge government searches in court” (ACLU,

Another recent court case that remarkably challenges the Fourth Amendment is, Riley v. California. The case covered the right of officers to obtain information from cellular devices. The case ended with the need for warrants to be issued to legally search cellphones. There are court cases that will always go on fighting these rights constantly due to error or sheer ignorance, but the natural rights of citizens

On the other hand, this amendment makes it strenuous to conduct surveillance without a probable cause. The Fourth Amendment was a suitable change to the Constitution because it ensures citizens’ privacy cannot be invaded, ensures citizens’ property is secure from seizure, and stipulates searches must be approved by a judge although it makes finding evidence

The patriot act has in my opion violated the 4th amendment. It has its advantages as far as terrorizim but to normal citzens this is a complete violation of our privacy. bThe late Benjermin Franklin warned us about trading our liberty for sucureity. This act has taken away a lot of our liberties it gives the government way too much power to invade our privacy. They now have unprecedented power to monitor the phone calls, e-mails, without a warrant.

The Fourth Amendment contains some points that could be used for malicious purposes and technically still be Constitutional. For example, law enforcement officer can use a subpoena instead of a warrant, according to Your Digital Trail: Does the Fourth Amendment Protect Us? (2) Subpoenas are easier to get since they do not require a judge to determine if there is probable cause, yet there are more ways a law enforcement officer could cheat to get someone to remove his/her rights. According to Wex Legal Dictionary | The Fourth Amendment, if the person convicted confesses or agrees to nullify the effects of the Fourth Amendment, it cannot protect them.

Cell phone can unveil information within our call history, text messages, pictures, and even internet searches. Access to our cell phones is like access to our lives. No matter how much time passes, the fourth amendment continues to

The whole point of the Fourth Amendment is not to completely stop the police, because the amendment can be waived if an officer has a warrant, or a person’s consent. The Fourth Amendment states that generally a search or seizure is illegal unless there is a warrant, or special circumstances. Technically stating that a citizen is protected by the Fourth Amendment, until a government employee gets a warrant, and then they can invade a citizen’s privacy. Also people state that the FISA Court’s warrants are constitutional, but the NSA’s surveillance is unconstitutional. Even though people do not like the NSA’s surveillance, the NSA is legal because the FISA Court that the people did not mind makes it legal.

The convenient thing about this is that you can do as you please without the worry of the government trying to disrupt your peace. It also helps people of color feel protected from police officers who could be racist, and just want to go through their belongings to arrest them. Another advantage to this is that you don 't have to let police officers inside of your home if you don 't please to do so. However, the downside to this amendment is that valuable time to police officers is wasted since they have to wait for a search warrant to proceed with their job. Another downside is that if they do happen to search someone without a warrant and they find what they were looking for it won 't be able to be used as evidence against the

Police officers and government employees may not search a person’s property unless they have a warrant. Some pros about the fourth amendment are privacy of citizens, secure property from