Posted: September 5th, 2022

Privacy after 9/11

Privacy after 9/11
Since the events of 9/11, the demands for global information and intelligence gathering have never been as great as they are today. The increase in citizens expectations and demands for privacy rights and the increased regulatory requirements imposed on businesses to protect consumers privacy rights places these two issues on a major collision course.

In this paper, you are to explore the issue in detail, discussing the information and investigative demands of law enforcement and national security and how those policies, practices and procedures affect the privacy rights of individuals and impose new requirements on businesses to cooperate with the legal requirements placed on them to assist national security and law enforcement information gathering efforts.

Along this path, you should include an in depth discussion of the various investigative and information techniques being utilized, what the goal of the technique is and what the various privacy issues and ramifications are for the individual, the businesses involved in providing the information, the agencies and the country as a whole through the use of that investigative technique or information gathering tool or practice.

Further, you should include a discussion involving the current state of the issue (what we’re doing right vs. what you believe we may be doing wrong or could be doing better) and lastly you should address balance – i.e. when individual privacy and rights must yield to the greater needs of law enforcement and national security vs. where there absolutely needs to be a line that agencies cannot cross because the privacy rights are simply to great.

Privacy after 9/11
The Patriot Act developed right after the 9/11 attack was meant to enhance national security. The Act brought about changes in the surveillance laws where the government acquired the freedom to spy and monitor citizens. The government could gather information about an individual bank reporting and Emai conversations to track terrorists and other criminals. Since then, the tension between privacy, national security and law enforcement have increased contributed by the current nature of surveillance and investigation (Latimer, 2018). The paper seeks to discuss privacy after 9/11, which has changed the demand for global information and intelligence gathering.
The post 9/11 attack reforms have led to changes in the security sector, emphasizing the use of information technology to enhance information gathering, however, the reforms have raised other issues, such as information sharing and domestic intelligence seeking to address community challenges and enhance transformation in the future. The big question is whether the changes have made the nation secure or led to other major issues. Privacy has been a major concept since the twentieth century, where people have a lot to be cautious about, especially in this era of big data (Latimer, 2018). Individuals and business corporation expectation of privacy has grown concerning government surveillance, law enforcement and national security. Business corporations and individuals show coporation by urging national security and law enforcement to follow legal rules when gathering information and stop invasion of privacy.
Additionally, business cooperation secure information to prevent competitors and criminals from invading into important and confidential information that could affect business continuity. Like law enforcement and national intelligence, large business corporations tend to gather information about people from the internet while looking for a market that is unlawful and against human rights. The privacy acts, such as the computer fraud and abuse act (CFAA) and electronic communication privacy Act (ECPA), have continued to grow, where most cases of privacy and security receive a different reaction in court. The evolution of cyberspace and big data has motivated the national security to develop new and modern strategies inspired by the post 9/11 reforms.
Investigative and information gathering techniques being utilized today involve electronic surveillance with a variety of capabilities in law enforcement and national security. Electronic surveillance consists of audio surveillance, tracking surveillance, data surveillance and visual surveillance. Audio surveillance consists of technology, such as listening devices, phone tapping and VOIP, also known as a voice-over-internet protocol. The audio surveillance is used to collect information during the investigation process to enhance the originality of the evidence (Chesney, and Citron, 2019). The tracking surveillance consists of the body-worn devices meant to monitor and see activities happening in public, the thermal imaging device and the hidden video cameras in business premises and cars. The data surveillance techniques are used to gather information already existing in various forms. For instance, the information may be hidden in an individual personal phone. The technology includes the use of spyware to acquire information on the internet and the use of keystroke.
Tracking surveillance has assisted in collecting important and rare information concerning serious cases. For instance, the use of geographical positioning systems, geographical information systems, the use of retina scans and other biometric technology and the radio frequency identification device to locate terrorists. The national security and law enforcement community should lean the boundaries and the information to collect when dealing with national threats. Since the intelligence community tends to collect massive data, the data collected should be minimal and not too confidential to jeopardize the owner’s private life or put the individual at any risk.
The main goal of using technology in gathering information and investigation includes tracking and bringing prospects into the light, dealing with serious and latest cases involving technology, such as terrorism and organized crime groups. Advancement in technology has led to the growth of crime where current crimes involve computers and other digital devices (Latimer, 2018). For instance, organizing crimes through the dark web and terrorists using information intelligence to conduct terror attacks. The evolution of technology and the growth of big data have created new security and privacy demands where the security system requires advanced and secured network systems to deal with high standard crimes. The issue of privacy and security in the United States originated after 9/11(Chesney, and Citron, 2019). Today, the American right to privacy is at stake, especially in determining the current surveillance. The citizens are concerned whether surveillance is conducted for law enforcement reasons or intelligence gathering. The new technology has brought about connectivity and enhanced policing but has eroded the United States citizen their privacy rights due to a lack of checks and balances. The use of technology such as crime mapping, imaging technology, DNA, car cameras, and aerial transportation has enhanced information gathering and interfered with individuals’ privacy according to the fourth amendment.
The use of video cameras and automobile technology with tracking systems has enhanced information gathering but also invaded in individual privacy. The video cameras record crime at the crime scene, which has been important in identifying suspects. The video cameras and the tracking system provides more information to the user who is private and was not intended. The information includes individual positions, information about the position of many people related to the prospect. The tracking record can provide information about the position of a person for a lifetime, including friends and family members. The use of video records and tracking systems has enhanced forensic information gathering and sharing, especially concerning traffic issues (Fuson, 2019). The information gathered through car records concerning the speed or location can, however, be used to track the individual and determine what the person has been doing n the past and currently. Gathering and storage of information have interfered with individual privacy where the information can be used in multiple ways and for other reasons not intended to.
Additionally, the use of infrared detectors, such as imaging technology to view beyond individual private homes and clothes, has enhanced investigation and interfered with individual privacy. The detectors violated the “reasonable expectation of privacy” according to the fourth amendment. The information gathered can be used to conserve energy and reveal identity using the recorded information. Various causes have been presented in court concerning the use of thermal imagery technology to detect the level of heat in a private property (Latimer, 2018). The law enforcement has gained knowledge from Kyllo v. the United States, No. 99-8508, on whether to acquire a search warrant when using technology during the investigation. The current technology presents information about the body in the investigation but not the identity which may change in the future. The post 9/11 privacy reforms have impacted communication and data storage, identity of a persons and data mining. In the new digital age, law enforcement uses effective methods in gathering, analyzing and storing information. Privacy develops when law enforcement officers collect information about individuals who are not yet involved in cases or have broken the law (Fuson, 2019). Law enforcement abuse the use of information gathering techniques to obtain and present unlawful evidence in court. For instance, obtaining information without a warrant or failure to read Miranda rights.
National security involves gathering and detecting information concerning threats directed to the United States. The threats include potential future threats where the government tends to gather secret information about another county or group of people without exposing its information (Chesney, and Citron, 2019). Intelligence agencies invade individual privacy by reading and invading individual emails and conversations to gather information that would impact national security. Intelligent information gathered by the government or intelligence agencies should be kept safe and not public. The biggest issue is that individuals whose information is gathered are unaware and do not know what type of information is gathered. In the case of cyber-attack from terrorists, the information can be compromised and exposed hence affecting the privacy of millions of individuals. The balance between the national security and individual’s privacy is at stake, where national security depends on the type and amount of information gathered from individuals. The quantity of intelligent information gathered does not dictate the relevance or correctness of the information. Most of the technological techniques used by law enforcement were developed for national security by intelligence agencies. For instance, the cryptography techniques used to gather and secure individual information through policies and codes.
Currently, the major concern and objective involve balancing national security and the post 9/11 civil liberties. Since the Obama administration spied and assessed phone information of millions of Americans, the public no longer sacrificed their privacy and liberty for national security. The 9/11 reforms have assisted in fighting terrorism and, at the same time, impacted citizens’ privacy and liberty. Over the years, the government has prioritized security, but individuals are currently more concerned with privacy as part of human rights (Fuson, 2019). The government is not doing right by going too far to protect the country, expecting the public to sacrifice civil liberty to curb terrorism. About fifty-four percent of individuals in America do not see the need to sacrifice civil liberty, especially allowing the government to monitor persona phones and read emails. Both the government and business corporations gather information from individuals for their interests, similar to the government (Latimer, 2018). The law enforcement and intelligence community should learn how to use advancing technology effectively without interfering with individual privacy. The departments should ensure information gathered is used for the intended purpose, and permission is obtained before using the information. Overall, respect for individual privacy, dignity and civil liberty is considered.
The privacy laws are out of date, especially the fourth amendment and the wiretapping laws. The laws offer exclusionary rules if the government violates individual privacy when using technology to gather information. Since the 9/11 broke the boundary between surveillance and intelligence gathering, the government and foreign intelligence surveillance are complex and lax (Chesney, and Citron, 2019). Law enforcement uses a warrant or probable cause when conducting search and seizure, but foreign information intelligence is different in its practices. The foreign intelligence surveillance and the electronic communication privacy Act. (ECPA) have different regulations concerning investigations and court processes. Foreign intelligence surveillance uses secret courts and foreign intelligence surveillance courts, also known as the FISC, to conduct a trial and prosecute offenders. The government has been on the front-line in violating the restrictions imposed by the foreign intelligence surveillance Act. Lack of judicial review and transparency when it comes to aw of privacy has affected and interfered with individual privacy (Latimer, 2018). The fourth amendment is no longer respected due to advancements in technology. Since the development of telecommunication, the intelligence team no longer considers individuals’ privacy and other countries’ privacy.
To revive the checks and balance back into the system, law enforcement and national security should be transparent and accountable. The government should reform laws concerning privacy and electronic surveillance, which will ensure the protection of privacy (Fuson, 2019). The law enforcement and the government should respect both the traditional laws and respect the need for a warrant and probable cause when gathering information. The federal government and law enforcement should stay within the constitution’s requirement when gathering information during surveillance and when gathering intelligent information. Additionally, the public should be aware of the government’s motives and practices when collecting intelligent information and understand the legality and effectiveness of the practices. Information sharing between law enforcement and national security should be done with transparency but not in isolation.

References
Chesney, B., & Citron, D. (2019). Deep fakes: a looming challenge for privacy, democracy, and national security. Calif. L. Rev., 107, 1753.
Fuson, H. (2019). Fourth Amendment Searches in First Amendment Spaces: Balancing Free Association with Law and Order in the Age of the Surveillance State. U. Mem. L. Rev., 50, 231.
Latimer, M. H. (2018). CHOOSING SECURITY OVER FREEDOM: THE INTERSECTION OF TECHNOLOGY AND PRIVACY IN A POST-9/11 WORLD.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Privacy after 9/11