POLS 2000 Lecture Notes - Lecture 7: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
5 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Kim 1
However, most reactions were negative and full of anger, claiming that this was a
violation of their privacy. “…privacy and sanctity in our homes and in our papers, and
individuals should be able to live without feeling like the government is spying on us…” (Pike,
2007, p. 227). To the majority of citizens, its confirmed that surveillance on citizens started to
shift from the feeling of protection to overbearingly invasive. Doing this also undermined the
trusting relationships between the government and the citizens (Dubal, 2012). The main
objection of this legislation came from the idea that no bureaucracy should have access to
personal information of American citizens because it invades their right to privacy (Stevens,
2008, p. 91). Even though continuing to enact and change laws would lead to an invasion of
privacy of some sorts, it was deemed crucial to the government to continue for the safety of the
United States (O’Brien, 2013, p. 183)
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
Even though the USA Patriot was a step taken to the goal of safety and prevention of
attacks, it wasn’t viewed as successful enough on its own. This led to the creation of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, which authorized warrantless surveillance of
international communications as long as one party of the communication was “reasonably
believed” to be outside of the United States (Hina, 2001). Prior to the FISA Act, citizens were
not afraid of their privacy being invaded because the Fourth Amendment protected the right of
every American from unreasonable searches and seizures of their property by the government.
However, the FISA Act allowed the government to collect communications between the US and
the rest of the world, which meant data would be collected from parents calling their children
studying abroad or emails to friends serving in Iraq, with no suspicion of any wrongdoing
(LoConte, 2010, p.3). Outraged citizens argued that this method of surveillance does not go
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
However, most reactions were negative and full of anger, claiming that this was a violation of their privacy. Privacy and sanctity in our homes and in our papers, and individuals should be able to live without feeling like the government is spying on us (pike, To the majority of citizens, its confirmed that surveillance on citizens started to shift from the feeling of protection to overbearingly invasive. Doing this also undermined the trusting relationships between the government and the citizens (dubal, 2012). The main objection of this legislation came from the idea that no bureaucracy should have access to personal information of american citizens because it invades their right to privacy (stevens, Even though continuing to enact and change laws would lead to an invasion of privacy of some sorts, it was deemed crucial to the government to continue for the safety of the.
