NSA's Surveillance Program and Impact on Privacy and Civil Liberties - Essay Example

The NSA’s Surveillance Program and its Impact on Privacy and Civil Liberties The Essay includes a brief introduction to the leaks and views on it from the Judges and Presidential group. The essay further answer the question that whether the recommendations eliminates Jeff’s fears of how our Government might end up using personal communication data. Effects of the NSA’s Leaks by Snowden on the American Society and Actions of Judiciary After the leaks published by “The Guardian” provided by Snowden a tech specialist for the NSA who were working for a consulting firm named Booz Allen Hamilton and unmasked himself using the above stated journal and another one named The Washington Post as a source for disclosing a previously unknown U.S surveillance programs which he named as “Systematic Surveillance of Innocent Citizens” by disclosing some secret intelligence documents of the National Security Agency (NSA). (Barton Gellman) After this revelation of the Snowden an air of insecurity of privacy was felt in US citizens about the legality of this action from NSA. Many citizens groups decided for litigation and filed appeals for it in the courts. The case in New York was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. Appeals were filed in different cities of the state. The court of New York lead by Judge William H. Paulley III ruled the collection of “Telephony Metadata” by NSA was legal, while the Judge Richard J. Leon in Washington who ruled the program as unconstitutional and termed it as “almost Orwellian” program. (Liptak) other analysts considered these decisions as matter and antimatter. The decision of Sir Pauley’s court was very disappointing for those who filed the appeal that is the American Civil Liberties Union. A lawyer shows his disappointment by stating that the court has misinterpreted statutes and understated the implications of the surveillance on the public privacy by ignoring core constitutional provisions and basing decisions on a precedent. (Liptak) The point of view for the same decision of the New York court was different from the Justice Department they exclaimed with joy and shows their happiness by giving statement that “They are pleased with the decision of the court by declaring the NSA’s bulk telephony metadata collection program as legal” (Liptak). The two Judges were having completely different understanding of the case and therefore their decisions were considered as matter and anti-matter. Point of View of Judge Pauley: The judge’s opinion was seemingly affected from the recent arguments made in favor of the program by senior government officials including those from FBI. The Judge wrote that the program would have helped the US in preventing the 9/11 massacre if it was available at that time. He placed impetus to his point by stating the misconception of officials about the presence of the hijacker in the US due to non-availability of missing information that could have been provided by Telephony metadata which became the cause for mishap of 9/11 (Liptak). The Judge were of the view that non-availability of Telephony metadata could become the reason of any mishap in the US and therefore ruled it as legal to enable the NSA to carry on its mission of security and benefit of US nation by eliminating terrorism inside and outside USA (Agency). The other main dispute among the judges was uncertainty and difference of opinion on how to interpret 1979 Supreme Court’s decision in Smith v. Maryland. Judge Pauley Wrote that in the above stated case the court’s holding was that an individual has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information provided to third parties (Liptak). The Judge’s point of view for application of Fourth amendment was that the collection of bulk metadata does not comes under the application circle of Fourth Amendment. Judge Leon’s Point of View Judge Leon were completely of differing opinion to that of the Judge Pauley. He has taken the opposite stance by stating that the Government were not able to cite even a single evidence of stopping any attack in the US using NSA’s bulk metadata or otherwise assisted the government in any other crucial time using the same program. (Liptak) In application of 1979 Supreme Court order the Judge taken again an opposite stance by stating that advances in technology and suggestions in latest Supreme Court’s decisions had undermined the Smith ruling (Liptak). The view of Judge Leon for application of fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable government searches in this case was that the ability of government for collection of bulk metadata needs analysis as to determine how to apply the Fourth Amendment (Liptak). The presidential Review Group Point of View The group decisions are seemingly leaning towards Judge Leon’s decision however it was considered as middle way of both the decisions. The group ruled by stating that though the program assisted in prevention of terrorism and attacks inside or outside US but the main purpose of the program was no the prevention of attacks they based this argument on their review. The Group took a neutral stance about the application of 1979 law was that it is not their job to determine the validity of the 1979’ law but rather they are responsible for making sound public policies. The Group also recommended that bulk metadata shall be surrendered to a system and shall not be given to private providers or to another third party the Group further recommended that access to such data shall only be granted with the authority of a court order. (Liptak) Fears of Jeff Jarvis and Board Recommendations Effects on It Jeff considers the collection of metadata as the application of “Tyranny”. Or the misuse of the government’s authority. He considers the monitoring of telephones and other internet data sent or received by citizens without any reason of suspicion of a crime, or any other kind of involvement in such actions that could or would cause harm to the people of US as overreach of the government’s authority. The second thing that Jeff cares about is the place where that data should be and government’s ability to use such data. He believes that principles regarding this matter shall be made by consensus of the interested parties over its keeping and use in order to restrict its wrong use by any person that is either government or other private third party. The Jeff also suggested the government to devise principals for the security of privacy on lower level if it is problematic for the government to apply controls on large scale that is on metadata level. The Jeff also considered the collection of metadata as violation of Fourth Amendment and stated that the NSA is using the unauthorized data and treating us all as criminals without any suspicion and due process. At last the Jeff said that the after the revelation of Edward Snowden it has been proved from the NSA’s course of actions that it was not only the issue of creating a system for collection of metadata but it also included wholesale cleaning of communication on internet, creation of back doors in technology and spying on other nations’ officials he concluded on the point that it is the overreach of authority and needs attention of the lawmakers. (Jarvis) Board Recommendations The board however recommended that the acquisition of foreign intelligence data shall be targeted to the assigned tasks only and the FISA will review such actions but Does not eliminated the Jeff’s fear that was spying on foreign nations’ officials in recommendation 1,2, and 3. The recommendations contains minimization of queries for US citizens but again does not eliminate the fear of censorship described by Jeff. The FISA role is defined clearly but they authorities are again granted full access as to attachment of application for certification purposes in recommendation 4. The FISA is endowed with authority for certification of rules for operation of 702 which satisfy the Jeff’s argument for authorization of use of metadata. The 5 points in recommendation 9 again hit the Jeff’s concerns about application of tyranny by implementation of monitoring/collection of metadata without any suspicion and due process. (Board.) Overall the recommendations by Board did not eliminate the Jeff’s arguments. Works Cited Agency, National Security. "NSAs Mission, Vision, Values." Statute Laws. Washington, United States: GPO, 2009. Document. Barton Gellman, Aaron Blake and Greg Miller. "Edward Snowden comes forward as source of NSA leaks." The Wasshington Post (June 2013). Dcoument. Board., United States Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight. " Civil Liberties and Privacy Oversight Board Report." Board., United States Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight. Civil Liberties and Privacy Oversight Board Report. Washington: GPO, 2014. Part 6. Document. Jarvis, Jeff. " “The primary NSA issue isn’t privacy, it’s authority.”." The Guardian 30 December 2013. Print Media. Liptak, Adam and Michael S. Schmidt. " “Judge Upholds N.S.A.’s Bulk Collection of Data on Calls.”." The New York Times 28 December 2013. Print media. Van Buren, Peter. "“10 Myths About NSA Surveillance That Need Debunking.”." Mother Jones (Jan 2014). Document. Read More