The government threat to free expression: A British newspaper, The Guardian,
reported last year that the FBI is seeking new powers "to hack into and
carry out surveillance of computers in the U.S. and throughout the
world." According to civil liberties groups cited by the paper, this
power represents "a power grab by the agency that would ride roughshod
over strict limits to searches and seizures laid out under the fourth
amendment of the U.S. constitution, as well as violating first amendment
privacy rights."
The FBI request is part of a proposed change in its rules of engagement
that critics say is an unconstitutional power grab. The newspaper quoted
Ahmed Ghappour, an expert in computer law at UC Hastings college of
law, who said, "This is a giant step forward for the FBI's operational
capabilities…." To be seeking these powers at a time of heightened
international concern about U.S. surveillance is an especially brazen
and potentially dangerous move."
Under the proposed rule change, a judge can issue a warrant that will
allow the FBI to hack into any computer no matter where it is located.
Critics say this capability will give a green light for the FBI to hack
into any computer in the country or around the world.
A link to the Guardian story is here.
Principles and discussion: This is an extremely troubling
report because it expands the federal government's power to spy on U.S.
citizens. Indeed, the critics cited by the Guardian find this
extremely alarming. This kind of government surveillance, even if it's
motivated by legitimate anti-terrorism concerns, appears excessive. As
Geoffrey Stone notes in War and Liberty, the Fourth Amendment is
supposed to guarantee "the right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches…"
(xvi). On the face of it, the new FBI powers appear very broad and
easily abused, which is cause for concern. Moreover, as Lewis notes in Freedom for the Thought That We Hate,
President George W. Bush "secretly ordered wiretapping of Americans'
international telephone calls without obtaining the warrants required by
law" (151). In short, the federal government in recent years has
increased (and abused) its powers to spy on Americans and, at the same
time, repeatedly failed to protect the civil liberties of citizens
guaranteed by the First and Fourth Amendments.
--Submitted by John Coward
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Ongoing forms of government surveillance raise startling concerns regarding the invasive nature of surveillance that hinders our fundamental rights to privacy as American citizens. The change illustrated in this report would not only infringe upon the rights entitled to citizens in accordance with the First and Fourth Amendments, but would also discourage individuals from trusting their government. This instilled fear would ultimately deny individuals the security of knowing that their rights to property are protected against “unreasonable searches” (War and Liberty, xvi). Justice Frankfurter and Justice Harlan, two conservatives on the Supreme Court during the late 1950’s, also supported this view arguing against dominant forms of surveillance in Freedom for the Thought that We Hate. They argue, “the inviolability of privacy belonging to a citizen’s political loyalty has so overwhelming an importance to the well-being of our kind of society that it cannot be constitutionally encroached upon on the basis of so meager a countervailing interest of the State as may be argumentatively found in the remote, shadowy threat presented by the Progressive Party” (117). In conclusion, the interests of the State should not merge with the private interests and affairs of American citizens. American citizens should be rightly informed if this change is implemented, so they can become active in protecting their individual privacy. Individuals should then remove private information that they do not want shared on their computers.
-- Carly Chalmers
Post a Comment