Study Guide (old guide)
The state and security services still have the most powerful
surveillance systems, because they are enabled under the law. But
today levels of state surveillance have increased, and using
computers they are now able to draw together many different
information sources to produce profiles of persons or groups in
The Fourth Amendment
When the framers wrote the Constitution
and the Bill of Rights they specifically addressed that day's most
pressing privacy fears: (1) that government would search one's home
whenever it desired and (2) the quartering of troops in the home.
The framers, however, were unable to address future changes in
technology and the myriad of privacy concerns that have evolved as
new technologies permeated their way into our society. Therefore one
must ask whether the law protecting the right to privacy has evolved
with the new technologies to ensure the vitality of the Fourth
Expectation of Privacy
expectation of privacy is used to determine whether the Government's
actions with regard to obtaining evidence are lawful. This
expectation must be satisfied by an affirmative response to these
Expectation of Privacy ,"Judicial implementations of the
Fourth Amendment need constant accommodation to the
ever-intensifying technology of surveillance" (Dean v.
Superior Court  35 Cal.App.3d 112, 116); "the Fourth
Amendment must likewise grow in response" (United States v.
Kim  415 F. Supp. 1252, 1257)
Statute (Title III):
Communications Privacy Act
Intelligence Surveillance Act
After Sept. 11, government had expanded power to law enforcement
agent to seek information for anti- terrorist such as USA
Patriot Act (H.R. 3162) and Terrorism
Information Awareness Program. This bill involved surveillance population
of United State and International whom live in the United State. There is
some guide line that set by the Government
Surveillance. This USA Patriot Act should be expired least year.
However, the bill had been extending for longer period. For that is raise
questions about the right of the US citizens under the Fourth
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution . According to Key
Controversies by Larry Abramson and Maria Godoy state that major change
for surveillance provision.
and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept
and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 is known as USA
Patriot Act (H.R. 3162). The bill had significantly increased the surveillance
and investigative powers of law enforcement agencies in the United States.
Many of the provisions of the Act relating to electronic surveillance were
subject to much criticism and debate (USA
PATRIOT Act Page).
The USA PATRIOT Act that involves surveillance including
Mike DeWine (R-OH) introduced the bill, popularly named the Terrorist Surveillance
Act of 2006, on March 16, 2006. DeWine
Bill would allow special intelligence subcommittees to oversee
electronic surveillance programs and would allow warrantless surveillance
in some circumstances without judicial review. The citric describe in CDT
Analysis: Dewine Bill the believes that the bill should
not pass until being fully investigate details of any surveillance programs.
Information Awareness Program - The Pentagon's Office of Information
Awareness is developing a vast surveillance database to track terror suspects.
The Total Information Awareness (TIA) system allows law enforcement to “data
mining,” which critics state in Beware
of Total Information Awareness. TIA would search thousands of databases
and collect records about mostly innocent people. It would give government
the power to generate a comprehensive data profile on any U.S. citizen. However,
It program was shut down by congress.
Wiretapping is other form
of the government surveillance
that Fcc propose. if the proposeal is passed , this will allow the backdoor
for the FBI and other law- enforcement to tap into the communication system
include internet. Julius Knapp, FCC spokesman claim that this is in the limited
of the law it is just to enforce that the carrier company can provide information
when it need. However, U.S.
v. Councilman case was argu about offered e-mail accounts to clients was
Audio and Video Surveillance
The "reasonable expectation of privacy" should apply as an ethical
guideline. In general, employers can monitor the activities of their employees
to uncover a variety of issues, including theft, substance abuse, vandalism,
corporate espionage and other illegal or unauthorized activities. Central
to this concept is that the workplace is not a location in which, under
normal circumstances, persons consider their actions private. On the other
hand, surveillance in the workplace must not intrude on those areas where
persons consider their activities private. A restroom is an example of
such a place. In some cases, the public presentation of a Warning Notice
stating that a particular area may be under surveillance tends to mitigate
a person's expectation of privacy.
2512 of the U.S. Code, manufacture, distribution, possession and advertising
of wire, oral or electronic communication intercepting devices is prohibited.
Excluded from this law are officers or employees under contract to the
Federal government, a State or subdivision thereof. This is taken to mean
that, with proper authorization, Law Enforcement agencies may be able
to use covert audio surveillance. Agencies should review the laws for
their jurisdiction before using audio surveillance. Clearly, covert audio
surveillance is not permissible in the private sector.