Making U.S. security and privacy rights compatible

Abstract

The terror attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, necessitated changes in the way domestic intelligence agencies and services conducted information-collection activities to protect against further attacks. Congress acted quickly to prevent the next attack by expanding government authority under the USA PATRIOT Act and the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court. This gave domestic intelligence services the tools needed due to advances in technology that allowed terror organizations and suspects to travel, communicate, raise money and recruit using the Internet. Safeguards were written into the enhanced authority to protect against privacy abuses by government. Ten years after 9/11, civil-liberties advocates called for more transparency, more privacy protections and better oversight because of past abuses by government officials operating in the name of national security. Leaks about government spying on U.S. citizens have heightened the balance debate between security and privacy. Privacy or security is not a zero-sum game. A policy that incorporates an adversarial process in the FISC and a streamlined oversight mechanism in Congress for more effective oversight, and the release of redacted classified documents to educate the public about surveillance techniques, would instill more balance and greater public trust.