Patriot Act Section 215

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

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 response, the United States implemented the USA Patriot Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by providing appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act), significantly impacting homeland security within the country. The act introduced surveillance measures, such as monitoring communication networks like telephones and texts, to gather data and identify suspicious activity. Additionally, it allowed for the scrutiny of business records and financial transactions, aiding authorities in investigating potential terrorist acts and funding sources. According to statistics from the Pew Research Center, 42% of the public viewed the Patriot Act as a necessary tool to combat terrorism, while 34% believed it went too far and posed a threat to civil liberties. These differing perspectives reflect an ongoing debate regarding the act's impact on national security and civil liberties.

“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).

CONCLUSION The USA Patriot Act violates the Unites States Constitution. The Patriot Act's purpose is to protect Americans from foreign threats and domestic terrorist attacks, however, the cons of this Act far outweigh the pros. It is important to protect Americans, but the illusion of homeland safety is not worth relinquishing civil rights for.

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).

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

Many Americans feel that their privacy is being invaded, due to the fact that this act allows phones to be taped and records pulled, plus the ability to intercept Internet messages. The Patriotic Act has taken away our liberties, it gives federal government unprecedented power to monitor phone calls and emails of U.S. citizens without a warrant. It allows for bulk collection of Americans metadata.

Appreciatively, President Barak Obama renewed the law that was set to expire; “Authorize court-approved roving wiretaps that permit surveillance on multiple phones” (Fflambeau). Though, opponents argue that roving wiretaps are an infringement of individual rights, proponents remain head strong that the expansion is a key element to intercept and prevent terrorism. On face value, like unwarranted searches with exceptions to the exclusionary rule, roving wiretaps remain lawful through “executive ordering”

The Fourth Amendment protects all citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. The Fourth Amendment states any form of stalking, any form of eavesdropping, any form of searching and seizing are a violation of the 4th Amendment. This protects everyone of the United States(Oyez). Searching or seizing anything from someone in a private area without a

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 right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated… We all know the fourth amendment. It's the amendment that guarantees our safety within our homes and our personal belongings. Yet, how much do you know about the fourth amendment? The fourth amendment is full of history, controversy, and discussion, even in modern day.

The police used the act to access internet evidence to locate the criminal. Ridge said in the article “The Patriot Act Enhances National Security”, that “By protecting our freedom, civil liberties are enhanced, not diminished”(Ridge). Using the tools to find the criminals is helping to keep the citizens’ liberties safe. Although to do this, the government needed more communication between each branch to complete each

Have you ever wondered why the Patriot Act played a big part in history or why it is so important to us? Well the government has compromised our civil liberties through the use of the Patriot Act. They also abused our privacy which wasn’t fair for us. The history of the Patriot Act, the abuse of our rights, and the way everything ended made the Americans feel like they couldn’t trust their government because they felt like they were always being watched. Through the Patriot Act, the law enforcement agencies and the government are given wide optional powers to acquire information not only from suspected people but also from the law-abiding Americans.