...Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) became necessary in the 1970s after turmoil surrounding the legality of various domestic intelligence activities, especially that of President Richard Nixon’s usage of federal resources to spy on political and activist groups. In response to these conflicts in 1978 FISA was created (Banks 2007). FISA essentially regulated and authorized electronic surveillance of foreign powers and agents of foreign powers in the United States. FISA Court was created to setup a standard set of rules while obliging by government’s need to obtain surveillance orders secretly and as quickly as possible. However as a result of our changing world FISA has become a drastically more complicated law than when it was originally passed in 1978, and the role of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) has accordingly grown far beyond the bounds of what government envisioned when the law was created (Blum 2008). FISA has proven to be troublesome in multiple ways for both intelligence gathering agencies, and those concerned with its potential violation of the 4th Amendment and various privacy concerns. It has proved to be a bureaucratic burden for intelligence gathering agencies, but also increased scrutiny from the public about concerns surrounding the 4th Amendment. The best way to revive balance between keeping American safe from foreign threats and the constitutional viability of foreign intelligence surveillance is to forego the FISA warrant procedure completely...
Words: 2586 - Pages: 11
...NSA Surveillance Program The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was created in 1978 as a response to past presidential abuses of massive domestic wiretapping and surveillance that were conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA) on many innocent Americans. FISA was designated to limit warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance for national security purposes and to issue the extent to which NSA could seize domestic communications. An executive power would need a warrant approved by FISA and only for the cases where the sole intention for the surveillance was to obtain foreign intelligence information (Skalski 15). Things changed shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001 when President Bush secretly gave authorization to the NSA to wiretap Americans on the US soil without a warrant from FISA. By the same year, the Bush Administration passed the Patriotic Act that enabled FBI to demand the sharing of “any tangible things sought relevant to an authorized investigation” (Barnett 4), including strictly domestic records. Also, three days after the terrorist attacks, the Congress passed AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force) Act that was a necessity, but it was wrongly used by the Bush Administration as the reason of permission for the massive spying program. Because of the secrecy of these surveillance transmissions, the American public had no idea of the existence of these...
Words: 2180 - Pages: 9
...Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act: The Pros and Cons of Section 703. The FISA Act was created to govern the gathering of foreign intelligence. In 1952, President Thurman established the National Security Agency within the department of defense. The NSA is the premiere signals intelligence agency. In the United States Intelligence Community, agency efforts are channeled through the Director of National Intelligence (DNI). The American intelligence community works closely with foreign intelligence agencies, especially on SIGINT matters. The members of the Cold War era UKUSA Agreement (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and the United States) also known as ‘Five Eyes’(FVEY), are partially close collaborators. In the 1950’s the Executive branch was largely in control and unchecked by the Legislative and Judicial branches on Foreign intelligence matters. Some surveillance policies were narrowed due to constitutional concerns. The authority for foreign intelligence was identified in the President’s inherent Article II of the Constitution powers and a key legal check on that authority was the Fourth Amendment. The fourth amendment as interpreted by...
Words: 1030 - Pages: 5
...Alexander W. Joel is the civil liberties protection officer for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The job of a civil liberties protection officer is to work with the government's various intelligence and security agencies to ensure Americans' civil liberties and privacy rights are protected. That officer works with a large team of professionals to make sure that US intelligence-gathering and surveillance activities are constitutional and do not violate any laws. There are several layers of oversight for various activities, ranging from laws and agency regulations to oversight boards, congressional committees, and special courts, such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court. These bodies are all charged with ensuring the legality of security programs, and protecting civil liberties and privacy is a responsibility that everyone who works in the intelligence community takes very seriously. Many Americans probably don't know that there is a senior official whose job by law is to help ensure that civil liberties and privacy protections are built into intelligence programs. I am that official—the "Civil Liberties Protection Officer." I engage with the director of national intelligence and other intelligence officials to oversee and guide intelligence activities. I...
Words: 1271 - Pages: 6
... ETHICS OF WIRETAPPING Since the First World War, government has been known to use private companies to wiretap phone lines for information. The legal structures, established by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), have defined a framework for legally securing a warrant for searches and tapping into phone lines of the American populace. Sometimes the government uses warrantless wiretapping without proper authorization and it exposes telecommunications companies to legal and financial ramifications. What I will argue in this paper is that warrantless wiretapping is unlawful and not ethical, as it harms citizens and violates their privacy. My position is that it is not violation of personal liberties and is immoral for the NSA to have access data when your average citizen is not a threat. Not completely following this law pertaining to wiretapping deviates from the natural check and balance system of the federal government. The failure to procure a warrant when wiretapping violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, and provokes media criticism. The National Security Administration (NSA) and other government agencies are required to wiretap only with the direct written authority of the FISA-assembled courts through a signed warrant. In rare cases, however, such as an imminent terror plot, against the government should it be allowed to intervene. The law-abiding system of gathering warrants before wiretapping functioned well from...
Words: 1118 - Pages: 5
...Section 702 of FISA: Is discrimination between US and non-US persons justified? 1. Since the release of NSA’s classified documents by the NSA ex-contractor Edward Snowden, the controversy of morality and legitimacy of FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act), and, in particular, section 702, has become a major issue of public debate in the context of national security and privacy rights. To understand the underlying controversy, it is important to understand what powers section 702 gives to the US intelligence agencies. Section 702 of the Federal Intelligence and Surveillance Act (FISA) is the section that elaborates on the procedures and regulations for surveillance of non-United States persons while they are located outside the US. It...
Words: 2305 - Pages: 10
...citizens, should there be significant purpose to do so; yet, the same provision makes it easier for federal agents to gather information on a terrorist, and possibly prevent that terrorist from committing future crimes. |Provision |Risks to Civil Liberties |Aids the War on Terror | |Section 218 |Allows agents to obtain FISA warrants, requiring less |This provision makes it easier for agents to open a | | |evidence of wrongdoing, which can be subject to abuse |criminal case on terrorists, possibly preventing that | | |in domestic criminal cases. Only a significant |terrorist from committing future crimes. Reduces | | |investigative purpose is required to obtain a FISA |barriers between intelligence work and criminal | | |warrant. |investigations | |Section 215 |Upsurges the authority of the FBI under FISA, 50 |It documents investigators wide admission to library, | | |U.S.C.?1861. Whereas before, the FBI might vigor the |bookstore, rental-car and a lot of other particulars, |...
Words: 974 - Pages: 4
...every phone call made to and from the U.S. in bulk, even if the U.S. citizens involved are not part of an investigation.” (Ravenscraft) A court of appeals ruling ruled section 215 unconstitutional, but because it was set to expire, and the fact that Congress was debating on whether to allow it to expire or not, they did not order the shutdown of the program. Section 206 of the Patriot Act, “authorizes the NSA to receive permission from secretive FISA courts—courts that are not accessible to the public which grant warrants for surveillance—allowing them to wiretap any communication method that a suspect may use to communicate.” (Ravenscraft) The NSA also did not need a warrant if their target disposed of a “burner phone” meaning the NSA could tap into another line and would not need to prove that the target was presently using or had used that line. They would also not be required to turn over the name of their target. Another provision involves “lone wolf warrants.” This provision “allows the NSA to receive warrants from FISA courts for electronic surveillance of a suspect without showing that the person is connected to any known terrorist group or foreign power.” (Ravenscraft) This provision was never used by the NSA and as such has been allowed to expire. In order to understand what rights were violated, we have to look at the main programs that the NSA was involved in. The phone records gathering by the NSA is a perfect example. In 2013, a federal judge ruled that...
Words: 1631 - Pages: 7
...May The President Wiretap Without A Warrant To Protect National Security? The President, the one man with the most power with in the United States, the commander and chief of our country. Even though the President has such high power, they still must follow a set of rules called the Constitution. All wiretapping of American citizens by the National Security Agency requires a warrant from a three-judge court set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Without a warrant you are violating the Fourth Amendment. Which is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. I believe that no matter how high in power you are, you must follow our Constitution, just like citizens are supposed to follow the laws. A lot of this eavesdropping came to light during Bush’s Presidency, when he introduced the Terrorist Surveillance Program. The NSA was authorized by executive order to monitor, without search warrants, the phone calls, Internet activity, text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S. However, it has been discovered that all U.S. communications have been digitally cloned...
Words: 728 - Pages: 3
...Security Issues in Legal Context Discussion 5.1: Privacy in the Workplace The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which went into effect date, April 21, 2000, affects U. S. commercial Web sites and third-party commercial Web sites that schools permit their students to access. "COPPA requires "operators of websites or online services directed to children and operators of websites or online services who have actual knowledge that the person from whom they seek information is a child (1) To post prominent links on their websites to a notice of how they collect, use, and/or disclose personal information from children; (2) With certain exceptions, to notify parents that they wish to collect information from their children and obtain parental consent prior to collecting, using, and/or disclosing such information; (3) Not to condition a child's participation in online activities on the provision of more personal information than is reasonably necessary to participate in the activity; (4) To allow parents the opportunity to review and/or have their children's information deleted from the operator’s database and to prohibit further collection from the child; and (5) To establish procedures to protect the confidentiality, security, and integrity of personal information they collect from children. Non-profit sites are not included in the act; however, many are voluntarily complying. The Children's Internet Protection Act went into effect April 20, 2001...
Words: 2799 - Pages: 12
...Palatul Copiilor Bucuresti Procedura PG.01/Controlul procesului neconform Student: Stoica Alin Marian Grupa: 1541 B Bucuresti 2014 Cuprins 1. Scop: .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Domeniul de aplicare ................................................................................................................................ 3 3. Definiții și abrevieri ................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Definiţii ................................................................................................................................................ 3 3.2. Abrevieri ............................................................................................................................................. 3 4. Documente de referință ........................................................................................................................... 3 5. Descrierea procedurii ................................................................................................................................ 3 5.1. Identificarea şi modul de tratare a neconformităţilor ....................................................................... 3 5.2. Procedura stabileşte reguli generale .....................................................................
Words: 738 - Pages: 3
...making process. For this reason, a comparison is made to the policy making process that lead to the adaptation of the Foreign Intelligence Service Act of 1978. The examination of surveillance policies under the PATRIOT Act and FISA (Foreign Intelligence Service Act of 1978) provides examples of how exogenous or endogenous shocks can trigger drastic policy change. The negative...
Words: 528 - Pages: 3
...So, as the government maneuvers on how it is collecting information and interfering into someone’s privacy for the sake of protecting national security, we must take into consideration the individuals rights afforded under the constitution. Accordingly, the Supreme Court has established certain laws (Communications Act of 1934 and Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) that provide protection from electronic surveillance. (Michael F. Dowley) Also, “Congress enacted FISA in 1978 after revelations of widespread spying on Americans by federal law-enforcement and intelligence agencies - including NSA.” (Avery) We can all agree that the government is mandated by the constitution to protect its citizens, but in order to provide that protection, we should consider that some rights, in certain situations and with the proper justification might infringed upon their right to privacy. So, that the government may act on situations that pose a significant threat to our way of life, and therefore providing the mandated protection we ask of our...
Words: 1064 - Pages: 5
...means to you on a personal level. For example, Section 218 makes it easier for federal agents to open a criminal case on you or other citizens, should there be significant purpose to do so; yet, the same provision makes it easier for federal agents to gather information on a terrorist, and possibly prevent that terrorist from committing future crimes. |Provision |Risks to Civil Liberties |Aids the War on Terror | |Section 218 |Allows agents to obtain FISA warrants, requiring less |This provision makes it easier for agents to open a | | |evidence of wrongdoing, which can be subject to abuse |criminal case on terrorists, possibly preventing that | | |in domestic criminal cases. Only a significant |terrorist from committing future crimes. Reduces | | |investigative purpose is required to obtain a FISA |barriers between intelligence work and criminal | | |warrant. |investigations | |Section 215 |This poses a risk to a basic violation of privacy. |It makes potential terrorists easier to spot through | | |This information can also be misconstrued. A |detected patterns in behavior. A person borrowing | |...
Words: 714 - Pages: 3
...Cuprins: Cap.1 Prezentarea generala a intreprinderii 1.1.Scurt istoric 1.2.Obiect de activitate Cap. 2 Structura organizatorica a intreprinderii 2.1. Structura organizatorica-expresie a organizarii formale a intreprinderii. 2.2. Documentele de formulizare a structurii organizatorice. Concluzii Bibliografie CAP 1. PREZENTAREA GENERALA A INTREPRINDERII. DATE DE IDENTIFICARE A FIRMEI. Numele firmei: SC BIBI TOURING S.R.L. Forma juridica de constituire: S.R.L. Activitatea principala: Activitati ale agentiilor de voiaj si a tur-operatorilor, activitatide asistenta turistica n.c.a.- 6330 Cod unic de inregistrare: RO18362372 din data de 09.021993 Atribut fiscal: R din data de 13.02.1993 Nr de ordine in Registrul Comertului: J29/2249/08.02.1993 Data inregistrarii la Registrul Comertului: 08.02.1993 Data inceperii activitatii: 1993 Sediul agentiei: Ploiesti, PrahovaBlv. Republicii, Nr. 10, Bl. 33, Parter tel: 0244 514768, 590631fax: 0244 4073461. 1. SCURT ISTORIC “BIBI Touring” este agentia de turism nr 1 din Prahova, cu peste 15.000 de turistiactivi. BIBI Touring este reprezentant EUROLINES Romania, membru ANAT si agentacreditat IATA. BIBI Touring are o rata de crestere accentuata si constanta in ultimii 7ani.Firma noastra „BIBI TOURING„ – PLOIESTI are placerea de a va oferi urmatoareleservicii:- Linie de autocar cu plecari zilnice spre Germania si saptamanal spre: Marea Britanie,Belgia, Franta, Olanda, Suedia, Danemarca...
Words: 3246 - Pages: 13
