Abstract The paper discusses the topic of the war on terrorism in America. Specifically it discusses how the American war on terrorism has created numerous threats to civilliberties in the USA. The paper states that many Americans fear the threat of another terrorist attack, and believe the government has the right to take any measures necessary to keep that from happening. The paper concludes that many of the government's tactics threaten the civilliberties of Americans, a topic that is often overlooked in the war on terrorism.
From the Paper "However, there are many areas where experts show American civil liberties are being threatened or decreased. For example, recent Congressional inquiries and votes indicate the concern over loss of civil liberties when it comes to phone surveillance and records. After 9/11, the US Patriot Act modified many rules and regulations regarding gathering foreign and domestic intelligence. One of the most controversial was the ability to wiretap or listen to phone, wireless phone, and email communications. Before 9/11, there were stringent guidelines on what type of communication could be wiretapped, and suspects who were wiretapped had to be notified if the evidence collected could be used against them in court. The Patriot Act relaxed these rules, making it much easier for agencies to wiretap both foreign and domestic phone calls, with little or no provocation. This means that the government essentially can listen to any conversation they want to, whether they believe it has a relationship to the war on terror, or not, which is clearly a violation of the right to privacy guaranteed in the Constitution (Etzioni 52). A recent bill would have absolved communications companies of any liability in these wiretapping cases, but Congress defeated that bill, indicating the growing concern over the loss of civil liberties."
Abstract In this article, the writer notes that, following the events of September 11th, the Patriot Act was developed in an effort to prevent further terrorism from occurring. The writer then argues that the nature of the Patriot Act has been called into question because of concerns that the Act interferes with the civilliberties of Americans. The purpose of this discussion is to expound upon why the Patriot Act interferes with the CivilLiberties afforded Americans via the Bill of Rights. The writer concludes that the Patriot Act is unconstitutional and should be amended to ensure that the civilliberties of persons living in America are not violated.
Outline:
Introduction
The Patriot Act and CivilLiberties Conclusion
From the Paper "There are several factors that contribute to the Patriot Act's infringement upon civil liberties. The primary problem with the Patriot Act involves the right to privacy. Under the Patriot Act, the federal government is given the right to search medical records, tax records, and even the books that an individual borrows from the library. In addition, the government also has the ability to conduct surveillance without permission. The government can also conduct secret searches of your home without telling you. All of these aforementioned invasions of privacy can occur under the patriot act without probable cause.
"These policies established by the patriot act are a direct contradiction with some of the statutes that were established in the Bill of Rights."
Abstract The United States is a country founded on the notion of protected civilliberties. After all, the pioneers who came to the country in the 18th century were themselves fleeing from persecution and seeking the freedom to practice their religious beliefs and the right to discuss their diverging views in public. Today, these freedoms are protected by law under the Bill of Rights. They serve to protect individual freedoms from encroachment by the government. It is largely through the Bill of Rights that the Constitution limits the government's powers over the rights of individuals. This paper examines the dual role the government takes in approaching such freedoms. First is the passive role, where the law prescribes that the government limit its role in matters of individual civilliberties. This includes the hands-off policy the government is supposed to take in matters such as freedom of the press and privacy rights. The second part of the paper then examines the government's more active role in enabling people to practice their civilliberties. This includes affirmative action policies that help address the historic inequality in the treatment of minorities and women.
From the Paper "In cases of freedom of speech, for example, many government bodies and private citizens have raised concerns regarding the effects of violent media on viewers, particularly children. Most proponents of media regulations are also interested in protecting free speech and the free circulation of ideas. However, critics like Roger Kimball and his followers maintain that brutal and violent images in media generate violence within their viewers, by corrupting individual morals. Because of this, Kimball maintains that the government "also has an interest in protecting the moral sensibility of its citizens, especially the young" (21)."
Abstract This paper examines some of the most controversial parts of the USA PATRIOT Act and attempts to determine if civilliberties really are being compromised. The author expresses the opinion that Americans should have to give up as few of these liberties as possible, but in the society that we live in today, Americans should be prepared to accept some advancements in law enforcement and be willing to forfeit a few freedoms for the sake of safety and security.
Background and Significance
Brief Overview of the Patriot Act
The Problem - Discussion and Analysis
Are CivilLiberties at Risk?
The Solution - New Legislation
From the Paper "On October 24, 2001 the One Hundred and Seventh Congress of the United States of America passed Public Law 107-56, also known as Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, or, the USA PATRIOT Act. The Patriot Act was passed in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, when terrorist group Al Qaeda hijacked passenger aircrafts and crashed them into the World Trade Center towers, the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania. Thousands of people were killed or injured in these attacks, and the government was under enormous pressure to develop legislation to prevent future attacks (Etzioni, 2004). The Patriot Act, which has proven to be some of the most controversial legislation drafted in our time, passed just six weeks after the September 11 attacks. The Act passed by an overwhelming margin, the vote in the House of Representatives was 356-66 and the vote in the Senate as an overwhelming 98-1. The Patriot Act was passed with very little public debate (Chang, 2001)."
Abstract This paper explores the origins and history of habeas corpus, from its roots that predate the Magna Carta through to the present day, where it is being employed to the benefit of hundreds that wrongly languish in prison. The paper also explains the distinction between civil right and civilliberty and discusses which applies to habeas corpus. Lastly, the paper looks at the historic ups and downs of habeas corpus and discusses its unique place in the Constitution, separate from provisions contained in the Bill of Rights.
From the Paper "Rights and liberties need to be at their strongest when public support is at its weakest. Civil rights are decreed by law, civil liberties are God given, and the actions of legislatures are inevitably governed by the politics of the time. Habeas corpus is a civil liberty included among the "self evident truths" of the Declaration of Independence, and alone one of the civil liberties that can be suspended by acts of the government during times of crisis. The president judged by history as one of the best, sought to suspend these liberties in time of extreme crisis in the nation's young history. It was circumvented to increase support during a world war, to intern "dangerous" citizens during another, and to grant due process rights to perpetrators of the war for the new millennium. It is now freeing hundred of wrongly convicted people of a crime. The future of habeas corpus is uncertain in the short term, but solid in the future as all inalienable rights bestowed upon the common man by his creator."
Tags: legislature, supreme court, society, magna carta
Abstract This paper examines, "The State of CivilLiberties: One Year Later", a report published by the Center for Constitutional Rights, which discusses a series of Executive Orders that indirectly seek to eliminate some of the most important aspects of American Constitutional rights. It looks at how these Executive Orders, which have been enacted since September 11, 2001, according to the CCR, are a threat to the civil rights that belong to every American. It shows how the orders enacted to fight the war on terrorism have nullified the rights of the people, as well as the responsibilities of the federal government. In particular, it discusses how the CCR is specifically concerned about the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution and the encroachments that certain orders have made on these Amendments.
From the Paper "The CCR believes that the most disturbing act to undermine the separation of powers was the establishment of military tribunals to try accused terrorists. According the CCR, the Executive has taken on "the most fundamental role of the judicial branch... it gives the President the power to decide who will be tried under the system, to create rules by which a trial will proceed" (CCR 6). The report states that all of the key roles in the military tribunal process are to be ?filled by military officers acting upon designation of the President.? In such trails, evidence will be presented as officers acting like prosecutors and will be judged by officers acting as judges. In addition, the accused's attorney must be found eligible for access to information classified as "secret" under the Defense Department guidelines."
Tags: fourth, fifth, sixth, ammendments, terrorism, rights
Abstract It has been asserted by some people that extending civilliberties, as well as participatory decision-making (that is, allowing workers to take part in managerial decisions) to the workplace would improve the American workplace. This paper examines this idea in relation to Nancy Ehrenreich's book "Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America".
Abstract This paper will discuss the ramifications of September 11th on American civilliberties. By presenting such legislations as the Patriot Act, we can see how nationalism after the attack has limited American freedoms of speech and action.
Abstract This paper takes a look at how the US Founding Fathers were faced with a number of important issues as they debated the form and content of the Constitution, not the least of which was ensuring that their own individual interests would be addressed in the new country. According to the paper, although it represented the work of many minds, the primary author of the first ten amendments to the Constitution was James Madison, but his reasons for advocating these civilliberties was substantially different than many modern observers might believe.
Outline:
Introduction
Review and Discussion
Background and Overview
Perspectives Articulated at the Constitutional Convention
The Changing Views of James Madison
Analysis and Discussion
Implications of the Ratification of the Constitution without a Bill of Rights
Conclusion
From the Paper "Moreover, in spite of significant across-the-board gains for many formerly disenfranchised citizens during the latter half of the 20th century, the Bill of Rights continues to experience the ebb and flow of political thought in the nation today. Indeed, the civil liberties contained in the Bill of Rights have been subject to the arbitrary vicissitudes of executive whim and fancy more than once in the nation's history, and the U.S.A. PATRIOT Act is just a recent example of how these rights can be adversely affected even with the constitutional guarantees therein contained. In the final analysis, then, it is reasonable to say that James Madison did a better job of executing his responsibilities at the Constitutional Convention and thereafter than many of his peers could have done, and the implications of his failure to do so have also been the subject of much scholarly debate over the years and these issues are discussed further below."
Abstract In this article, the writer provides a review of the relevant literature to show that Madison played a critical role in drafting the Bill of Rights due to his concern for balancing civilliberties and central government power. A summary of the research and important findings are provided in the conclusion. The writer points out that the research clearly shows that Madison was absolutely convinced of the correctness of his thinking at any given point in time concerning the need for ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The writer notes that it also shows that he was able to learn from mistakes, entertain the opinions of others without necessarily accepting them and contribute to the American nation through a life of public service that spanned 40 years.
Outline:
Perspectives Articulated at the Constitutional Convention
Federalist Perspectives
Bibliography
From the Paper "The first major confrontation concerning the ratification of the Constitution involving the need for a bill of rights occurred in Pennsylvania several weeks after the close of the Constitutional Convention; at that time, the Seceders from the state Assembly called upon their electorate to consider whether the rights of citizens could be regarded as safe under a constitution that did not contain a bill of rights; also in Pennsylvania, Samuel Bryan argued in 1787 that the absence of a bill of rights made it essential for a second constitutional convention to be held to address the errors and omissions of the first."
"In response to these charges, James Wilson articulated the basis for distinguishing between a government of unlimited powers and one of enumerated and defined powers; in fact, Wilson also significantly contributed to the drafting of the Constitution as a member of the Pennsylvania delegation to the Constitutional Convention and was a prominent legal scholar who would subsequently serve as a Justice on the original U.S. Supreme Court. In this regard, Wilson believed that because the Constitution already delineated the powers available to the national government, there was little need to amendment them for the people's protection because the national government was without power to interfere in these domains."
Abstract This paper discusses threats to civilliberties in the United States following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The paper explains that these threats fall into three broad categories: secrecy, erosion of checks and balances, and circumventing long-standing personal privacy protections. The paper discusses the reasons for these changes and how they are affecting American citizens.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Secrecy
Erosion of Basic Checks and Balances
Privacy
Conclusion
From the Paper "The last major threat to civil liberties, since the advent of September 11th, is the reduction of privacy in America. Privacy is one of the most valued of civil liberties for Americans. When asked if they'd be willing to allow the monitoring of telephone and e-mail conversations as a means of increasing national security against terrorism, only 34 percent of respondents were willing to give up this civil liberty (Davis & Silver). The ACLU clearly points out that the blurring of the lines between traditional separation of criminal investigation and intelligence gathering has seriously eroded the public's right to privacy. This is a backwards leap from the progress the country has made over the last four to five decades, when the FBI used programs such as COINTELPRO to harass civil rights leaders and anti-war groups ("Threats to Civil Liberties")."
Abstract This paper begins with a short history of Milton's changing philosophical viewpoints, followed by a chronology of the development of his masterpiece against censorship, "Areopagitica". The entire work is examined as a whole, then the paper focuses on how Milton uses the ability to distinguish personally between good and evil, or truth and error, as a gauge of the degree of civilliberty granted to that person by his or her country's governing body. The ramifications of censorship, as Milton describes them, are studied.
From the Paper "In his early days as a writer, John Milton came to realize three forms of liberty: religious, domestic and civil, and pointedly set out to defend each one. He began first with the notion of religious freedom, defended in such works as The Reason of Church Government (1642). Next came his short-lived marriage and subsequent divorce, which brought his mind strongly to the issue of domestic liberty, culminating in the prose work Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, in which he discussed the relation of the individual to the State, and condoned complete individual freedom in matters concerning personal welfare and happiness. Because of the reinstatement of censorship laws at the time, Milton was forced to publish this work "without license". Milton's pamphlets were subsequently targeted as banned materials. It was this event that spurred Milton to write his treatise on censorship and civil liberties, Areopagitica. While ineffectual at the time , Areopagitica remains a classic argument for freedom of speech."
This paper is a detailed analysis of the literature relating to the United States trade policy with China and its affects on civilliberties within China.
Abstract This work makes a thorough review of the available literature relating to U.S. trade relations and policy with China, as well as the impact that free trade has had upon human civil rights and democracy in the country of China. The paper states that one of the important outcomes of free trade in the country of China has been the reduction of poverty. This in turn, according to the paper, has lead to growing power vested in citizens of the country and less power vested in the ruling party. Furthermore, it asserts that the rapid change in China has been termed to be a 'transformation' in many primary aspects of living demonstrated in the improved economic and financial aspects in China, as well as serving to impact political aspects in the country as well. The paper concludes that the government in China does not appear to be ready to shun the economic benefits of trade liberalization even if that means making room for the effects of democratization that goes along with economic benefits.
Outline:
Introduction
Idealism versus Realism
Free Trade: U.S.and China Trade Relations
Trade Liberalization and Democratization
Creeping Democratization (Minxin, 1995)
Summary and Conclusion
From the Paper "The work of Ying Ma relates that in spite of what the United States or even the citizens of China may desire, 'the Chinese Government has so far quashed and neutralized pressure for fundamental political change. Beijing controls and stunts precisely those instruments that contribute to the success of broad-cased domestic opposition: It cracks down on political opponents, co-opts potential ones, and indoctrinates the masses. It is eagerly attempting to maximize economic modernization while minimizing its liberalizing effects.' (Ma, 2007) Ying Ma states that there are several 'concrete steps' that might assist promotion of democracy in China. The first of these steps is that 'the United States should not wade into the quandary of slowing Chinese economic growth and cannot stop the Chinese government from institutionalization itself or co-opting its rival political groups,...' however it is possible that the U.S. can do more toward combating 'other sources of authoritarian resilience by strengthening China's political opposition and countering the regime's restriction of coordination goods that range from press freedom to the ability to organize.'"
Abstract The author discusses the problems arising from the need for increased security and police activity in the light of rising crime rates and terrorism. However, according to the author, increased surveillance and police activity results in infringements of hard won human rights and civilliberties. The author of the paper contends that the parameters of the security apparatus must be carefully set, the boundaries between freedom and safety delineated in ways that do not blur the lines between public and civil rights. The writer also addresses the tendency for law enforcement agencies to judge segments of the population on the basis of race or religious background and how this also creates a situation where infringement of basic civil rights and liberties is possible. The author makes a personal statement at the end of the paper when he writes: "A society that loses its liberty is a police state. Modern day America is moving closer each day to that terrible point. "
From the Paper "Such attitudes encourage police, and other security personnel, to look on African-Americans with suspicion, again, particularly if they are young and male. Within the emerging security state, this equal to a greater probability that young Black men will be stopped and searched - even without good cause. Young African-American males, and other members of similarly suspect groups, will be probed into more closely, their records checked or seized. More and more, both private businesses and government agencies are requesting criminal background checks and credit reports on persons whose only crime is that they fit "the profile." Intelligence agencies capture e-mails and telephone calls in an ever-widening search for suspicious catchwords and phrases. The recent story of the fight over immunity for telecommunications companies that provided FBI agents with free access to private communications is but a case in point."
Abstract This paper discusses some of the many issues that have been raised in the debate between the protection of civilliberties and national security that has arisen since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. The paper looks at how and why the framers of the U.S. Constitution made the protection of civilliberties such an important part of the moral fabric of the country and how this may have in some way contributed to the difficulties in preventing such a devastating attack. The question of what needs to be done in order to prevent this from happening again, including discussion that may require changes in this basic tenet in American society, is also discussed. The author looks at some proposals for increased national security including profiling, that may, because of the nature of the Constitution, become impossible to enact. The paper also discusses why these changes must become necessary in order to protect the population against forces in society that were not in existence at the time the framers wrote the Constitution.
From the Paper "With the attacks of the World Trade Center the society saw the government investigators beginning to randomly eavesdrop on phone calls. They began to read mails that had before remained confidential; suspects were rounded up in thousands and detained without warrants and without any charges being made against them. New rules have since been established that claim that the administration has the right to monitor the communication that is considered with "reasonable suspicion". Racial profiling is being done as the FBI questions foreign nations within US soil on different visa statuses. Lists are drawn up and any person with even a remote link to the nations of the terrorist network al-Qaida is being rounded up. Justice officials say the men, all age 18 to 33 and with nonimmigrant visas, are not suspects but are wanted for voluntary interviews."
