Kara Campbell

October 2, 2013
Short Opinion Essay: Liberty vs. Security under the U.S. Constitution
Madison
There is a constant conflict between the responsibility of the United States government
ensuring national security while still protecting citizens civil liberties granted in the
Constitution. As the world modernizes, unprecedented issues arise that test the guidelines
established by the Founding Fathers of the document that would run the country for centuries.
One example involves the Patriot Act, passed under George W. Bush after the terrorism attacks
on September 11, 2001. The second involves the changes made to national security after the
Boston Marathon attack.
The Patriot Act stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate
Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. The Department of Justice did not feel it
was a violation of civil liberties (The USA Patriot Act...). Supports of the act believe it was
essential for George W. Bush to intensify national security after such a violent act of terrorism.
Thomas Jefferson also would have supported such responsibilities granted to the national
government. He favored actions by the Executive in particular to act outside "the Constitution to
protect the national interest in moments of great crisis or opportunity," (Yoo 2013, p. 423). This
was indeed a time of crisis. Opponents of the Patriot Act believed their civil liberties were being
threatened. The government was now able to investigate e-mails and Internet activities on the
domestic scale. Under the Patriot Act, government officials searched homes without notifying
them beforehand, called a sneak-and-peak search, (Ernst 2013, p. 80). They entered when the
residents werent home, downloaded their computer files, and took any items they wished (Ernst,
p. 80). This is a violation of the 4th Amendment. The 4th Amendment guarantees The right of
the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
searches, (Amendment 4: Search and Seizure). The excessive surveillance and
eavesdropping, also threatens free speech, a civil liberty guaranteed under the First Amendment
to the Constitution (Lowi et al 2009, p. 89). Although an increased sense of security was needed
and encouraged after such a devastating attack on September 11, the government still must not
infringe upon civil liberties, including the right to privacy.
Another issue has arisen in the past year, regarding the intensifying of national security
after the Boston Marathon bombing. 81% of Americans surprisingly support the addition of

camera surveillance on streets and in public places, (Miller 2013). This increased since the poll
was taken after the attacks of 9/11 (Miller 2013). Citizens do not feel an infringement upon their
civil liberties with this issue. Another civil liberty that was especially protected after the
bombing is the Freedom of Religion, or the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. This
clause protects the right to believe and practice whatever religion one chooses, (Lowi et al
2009, p. 81). The national government was no longer allowed to enter into or have cameras in a
mosque (Miller). This is also a protection of the 4th Amendment, for it requires a warrant in
order to perform the search. Still, 61% of Americans approach anti-terrorism policies cautiously,
ensuring that the national government is not overstepping its responsibility of ensuring national
security while still protecting their civil liberties (Miller 2013).
As technology increases, and the threat of terrorism on both the foreign and domestic
level increases, the government must ensure national security of the United States. However,
they must abide by the original guaranteed civil liberties of citizens established in the
Constitution and apply them to the current controversies. The Elastic Clause of clause Article I
enables the government to establish new laws that may not be expressed in the Constitution
(Lowi et al 2009, p. 47). This clause will benefit the nation as it progresses.
Works Cited
"Amendment 4: Search and Seizure." National Constitution Center. National Constitution
Center. 29 Sept. 2013. <http://constitutioncenter.org/constitution/the-amendments/amendment-4search-and-seizure>.
Ernst, Julia L.. "The Constitution in Times of National Crisis: Contextualizing Post-September
11 Constitutional Ramifications. North Dakota Law Review 88.51 (2012): 51-95. 30 Sept.
2013.
Lowi, Theodore J., Benjamin Ginsberg, and Kenneth A. Shepsle. American Government: Power
and Purpose. Brief Tenth Edition ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2009. 47, 80-89.
Print.
Miller, Zeke J. "Poll: Americans More Concerned About Civil Liberties In Wake Of Boston
Bombing. TIME.com. Time, Inc., 1 May 2013. 1 Oct. 2013.
<http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/01/poll-americans-more-concerned-about-civil-libertiesin-wake-of-boston-bombing/>.
"The USA Patriot Act: Preserving Life and Liberty." United States Department of Justice. U.S.
Department of Justice. 29 Sept. 2013. <http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/highlights.htm>.

Yoo, John. Jefferson and Executive Power. Boston University Law Review 88.421. 421-457.
14 Sept. 2013.