Monday, August 10, 2015

Assessment

Topic Discussion

Research Assignments

The Resolution

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance.

Key Terms

Substantially

Curtail

Domestic Surveillance

Surveillance Details

What is Surveillance?

“observation and collection of data to provide evidence for a purpose”

Spying

Monitoring

Data Collection

Visual Observation

Surveillance

As a process

Controlling

Sorting

Monitoring

Domestic Surveillance

“any imagery collected by satellite (national or commercial) and airborne platforms that cover the land areas of the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, and the territories and possessions of the US, to a 12 nautical mile seaward limit of these land areas.” (leaked US documents)

Meta-Data

Examples of meta-data:

Originating Phone number, email address, etc

The terminating phone number, email address, etc.

Time of call

Duration of call

…..This Information is collected in bulk (indiscriminately) as opposed to being collected based upon an individually-targeted warrant.

What Metadata is Not:

It is NOT ABOUT CONTENT of your phone calls, emails, etc.

It is NOT ONLY ABOUT PHONE DATA – can be collected on email, text, skype, etc

It is not UNAUTHORIZED – some judge has to give a thumbs-up (warrant, probable cause)

The Difference between Meta-Data and Warranted Surveillance:

Meta-data collects surveillance “in bulk” or “indiscriminately” – examples might include: The web activity of all persons in a zip code.

The phone activity of all persons in an area code.

Warranted Surveillance requires probable cause and tends to search a single person or a narrower range of persons.

Warranted surveillance can be used to search any person – but tends to collect less raw information (than meta-data). This is because meta-data gathers info on hundred – if not thousands of US person.

Hops….

A “seed #” is a phone number where probable cause has been obtained (a warrant).

Once a seed is identified – the agency is allowed to follow-up on all #’s within “two hops”

Domestic Surveillance Legislation

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (and the court it created – Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) is perhaps the most important source of legislative authority to domestically surveil

Electronic Communications and Privacy Act (1986)- limited storage of electronic communication. Outdated and amendments through other legislation has undermined its enforcement ability

Domestic Surveillance Legislation

Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001

“USA PATRIOT ACT”… or the “Patriot Act”

The Act enhanced investigatory tools to counter-terrorism

It specifically passed “Section 215 of the Patriot Act” (often referred to as “215”) – collect phone data and financial records

FISA Amendments Act (2008)-prevented lawsuits against telecom. Companies.

Important Info About the Freedom Act

The technical name is the “USA FREEDOM ACT” – which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and

Ending Eavesdropping, Dragnet-collection and Online Monitoring Act.“

Important dates: 2014 Original Freedom Act May 13th, 2015 – The US House of Representative passes

New Freedom Act. June 2nd, 2015 – The US Senate passes the New Freedom

Act

Differences between the Old Freedom Act and the New Freedom Act

General Consensus – from pro-privacy groups – that the New Freedom Act was a bit watered-down.

Many argue that some of the provisions of the Old Freedom Act should pass.

Important Laws that Authorize Surveillance:

We’ve talked a lot about the PATRIOT ACT – and, amongst other things, the PATRIOT ACT contains: Section 215 – which allows phone records to be collected. And – until

recently – was interpreted to allow “bulk” collection of phone records.

Section 214 – which is the Pen Register Section-any communication can be tapped if it part of an “investigation”

There is also Section 702 of the “F.A.A.” (FISA Amendments Act). This is home to the PRISM program

And Executive Order 12333 (usually called “Twelve-Triple 3”)

Judicial History

While there are many Supreme Court cases impacting domestic surveillance, 3 stand out as particularly important regarding its legality:

Katz vs US (1967), required warrants for wiretap searches (4th amendment)

Smith vs Maryland (1979), pen registers don't require warrants because they aren't searches (telephone number info isn't "private")

Kyllo vs United States (2001) - suggested that the reasonableness of the government’s use of a surveillance technology would depend on the availability of the technology (thermal images of someone's home violated 4th Amendment)

Judicial History

Domestic surveillance policies are being litigated in the federal courts now, especially those programs illuminated by Snowden

Two cases in particular - ACLU vs James Clapper and Klayman v. Obama – are at the forefront of constitutional controversies surrounding domestic surveillance (namely NSA surveillance policies)

The Supreme Court has YET to rule on the constitutionality of surveillance programs disclosed by Snowden

Affirmative

Most popular cases will be limiting the authority of the NSA

Curtailing, meta or bulk data

Racial Profiling

Disease Surveillance

Affirmative

Freedom Act

Repeal the Patriot Act

End drone surveillance

End all surveillance by government

Advantages

Islamophobia

Hegemony

Race

Gender

Rule of law

Advantages

Privacy

Economic advantages

Modeling

Soft power

Negative arguments

Surveillance good

Terrorism

Political implications

US Credibility/Heg

Economy

What to do now

2 Affirmatives

Freedom Act.

Drones Aff.