Sneak and peek warrant

either acquire data, or get court orders to acquire it. Previously a system of ‘hops’ needed to access the branches to other people or devices from that particular person's device. However this system is no longer in place as the ODNI have gotten clearance to jump straight to stage 4 of the process (Gerdes 2), which allows for access to 1 million people's devices or information (Gerdes 1). It is likely many of us have already been searched for no reason due to the rampant checks the government is able to do. On top of this the ODNI has a process that allows them to check absolutely anything without a warrant (Costly 2). The process is called “Sneak and Peek” the idea is essentially to do a quick search of someone's data or property without notifying them in advance. If anything turns up positive the government has the right to try them in the legal system. Regardless if they had a warrant or were breaking the person's constitutional rights. The FBI has also reserved the right to search anything it deems within “tangibility” (Costly 2). This tangibility could come from previous illegal actions caught on by the programs or for any other desirable or convenient reason. Because the Attorney general has the ability to authorize any investigation there is plenty of room for abuse. Additionally the ODNI programs operate on a closed mouth system. This system essentially prevents any associated party of a search, illegal or not. To retain any knowledge of the search. An example of…

The USA PATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001) Act was enacted by Congress in 2001 in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and “vastly expanded the government's authority to spy on its own citizens, while simultaneously reducing checks and balances … and the ability to challenge government searches in court”, (ACLU, 2010). The act permits investigators to conduct searches, authorizes…

Supporters of the act argue that this freedom of information allows the government to be more efficient in rooting out terrorism and protecting national security, without the hindrances of protocol. However, this is also a blatant infringement upon the privacy of Americans, and has also failed to produce any significant results in preventing terrorism in the United States (“Surveillance Under the Patriot Act”). Fortunately, the inclusion of a “sunset clause” within the act allows certain…

in airports are reasonable. This gives the government a broader power to intercept any type of communication to obtain valuable information. The government is allowed to call on a special court called a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for things such as wiretapping alleged criminals in an attempt to obtain the information needed to arrest the criminals. In the Sneak and Peek Search case, a woman by the name of Maria Ramirez who had originally come from a country where terroristic…

At the time, pundits never expected him to add more than a few additional names to the first 24 co-sponsors. By mid-August 2003, however, Sanders had garnered more than 130 sponsors - Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives alike - in support of his "Freedom to Read Protection Act," H.R. 1157, a bill that would exempt libraries and bookstores from section 215 and would require a higher standard of proof than mere suspicion for search warrants presented at libraries and bookstores.…

their property to be free from these searches unless a warrant is issued on the basis of a probable cause. Such warrants can only be valid if it describes the place to searched and the things to be seized. The objective of this amendment is to protect the citizens from arbitrary government intrusions. To be protected by the Fourth amendment, it is important that a legitimate expectation of privacy is demonstrated. This expectation is not subjective but should be recognisable by the society…

that agents would encounter if they sought to keep tabs on them. One thing terrorists could do to stay ahead of law enforcement would be to change their communication devices on a regular basis. They were taught this because every time they changed their device, agents would have to go get another search warrant to monitor their communications. Section 209 of the Patriot Act allows for what it called “Roving Surveillance”. This allowed agents to monitor the individual more than the device they…

In actuality, it granted federal law enforcement extremely broad and sweeping powers for prosecuting many crimes that don’t involve terrorism, in particular drug trafficking. Many of the provisions within the PATRIOT ACT had been specifically rejected by Congress before 9/11, but very few people, if anyone, actually read the PATRIOT Act as it had been changed in the middle of the night before voting. Our justice system is based upon a simple constitutional tenet. The government must have a…

What the president did The Uniting and strengthening America by providing Appropriate Tools Required to intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 or simply put, The Patriot act was signed into law on October 26th, 2001. The purpose of the Patriot Act is to deter and punish terrorist threats domestically and aboard. The act strengthens law enforcement granting them the necessary tools and applications in order to detect and prosecute terrorists around the globe and domestically. The Patriot…

Despite the privacy right that it disregards, such monitoring has proved to be effective in securing national security. Afterall, knowing that the government is watching or listening will lessen the risk of not only terrorism but other criminal acts, as offenders would know they are being observed. Authors Abramson and Godoy cleverly stated in their argument for the positive aspects of the Patriot Act. In regard to “Sneak and Peek” searches, the two authors state that they “allowed investigators…