Domestic Surveillance

Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, 2015

From Opposing Viewpoints in Context

Domestic surveillance is the act of a government gathering private information on its citizens. While
primarily accomplished through electronic means, it may also include physical surveillance. Domestic
surveillance is normally used to detect and apprehend criminals. In the United States, the practice
grew significantly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

The NSA and Domestic Surveillance

Most domestic surveillance in America is carried out by the National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA
was formed in 1952 by President Harry S. Truman. Although the NSAs original purpose dealt
primarily with cryptography, its focus quickly shifted to general intelligence gathering. Due to the
sensitive nature of its primary mission, the NSA largely operates in secret.

During the presidency of George W. Bush, government leaks revealed that the NSA was conducting a
large-scale warrantless wiretapping operation. It targeted all American citizens suspected of aiding
terrorists. The operation allowed the government to secure the communications, including phone
records, e-mails, text messages, and Internet browsing history, of suspects while skirting normal
judicial process.

The revealed program was immediately controversial. Its critics claimed that such a program violated
American citizens rights to privacy. Its supporters claimed that the program was necessary to fight
terrorism and that it only targeted a small number of people. When the program was challenged in
court, judges ruled that it was legal. They cited section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Acta bill passed in
response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001which gave the American government more
freedom to pursue terrorist organizations worldwide.

In 2013, former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked a large number of classified documents to
the press. These documents detailed several NSA programs aimed at large-scale domestic
surveillance. These programs, primarily PRISM and Upstream collection, automatically collect the
phone call history, digital messages, and e-mails of most American citizens and store them in a
database. If anything related to terrorism is discovered, the information in the database is queried,
allowing the government to search for more evidence. If more incriminating evidence is found, the
same process may be applied to anyone the original suspect is in contact with. The programs also
allow for recording phone calls, searching Internet browsing or posting history, and gathering any
information found on a suspects cellular phone or computer. This data may be stored indefinitely
without notifying the individual.

In addition to PRISM and Upstream collection, the leaked documents revealed that the NSA had taken
several steps to make future surveillance easier. These steps included programs targeted toward
breaking most popular forms of encryption and pressuring American companies to include back doors
in their software, allowing the government to bypass most forms of coding. They also included specific
hacking operations, such as acquiring millions of encryption keys from SIM cards in cell phones, giving
the NSA greater access to the contents of cellular communications. All NSA interactions with
American companies were accompanied by a gag order, thereby imposing harsh monetary and
criminal penalties if company officials disclosed the information to the public.

Defending Domestic Surveillance

Many advocates of domestic surveillance claim that the NSAs programs are necessary to keep
citizens safe. They assert that the programs allow the intelligence agency to find and apprehend
criminals, specifically terrorists, more easily than ever before. The information found by the NSA is
forwarded to law enforcement agencies, which then decide if any further action is necessary.
Government officials have assured the public that this program is effective and has stopped dozens of
domestic terrorist plots. However, due to the classified nature of the cases involved, no specific
examples have been revealed to the public. Proponents often argue that preventing more attacks on
Americans is more important than personal privacy.

Those in favor of domestic surveillance also note that most information available without a warrant is
only metadata. Metadata is the context surrounding digital communications but is not the
communication itself. For example, PRISM might collect the time a phone call was made, the length of
the call, its participants, and the locations of the participants. However, it does not automatically make
the content of the call available to law enforcement. Law enforcement agencies require a courts
permission to access the actual content of the call. In a speech addressing the issue in 2013,
President Barack Obama assured the American public that no one is listening to their phone calls and
that the programs are not aimed at average citizens.

Lastly, proponents of domestic surveillance argue that breaking codes and encryption has always
been one of the NSAs primary jobs. Finding back doors and ways to break popular forms of
encryption is essential to intelligence gathering. They assert that increasing Americas ability to
access information makes it easier for the United States to maintain technological superiority over its
rivals.

Opposition to Domestic Surveillance

Many opponents of domestic surveillance believe that the risk of NSA employees violating the privacy
of American citizens is not worth the additional security the NSAs programs may provide. They argue
that NSA employees have abused their power in the past and will be tempted to do so in the future.
For example, several NSA employees have been formally reprimanded for using PRISM and
Upstream collection to secretly track the activities of their spouses or romantic interests. These abuses
were common enough to warrant the nickname LOVEINT within the NSA.

Many critics fear that the information collected by these programs could be used for blackmail. These
concerns are not without precedent. Leaked documents detailed an NSA practice dubbed SEXINT, in
which the NSA collected information on targets sexual preferences gleaned from their Internet
browsing histories. The documents revealed that the NSA intended to subtly release this information in
order to publicly discredit the targets to stop their incendiary behavior. Opponents of domestic
surveillance fear such information, when stored indefinitely, could someday be used to influence
lawmakers, judges, or other important figures. Some even worry that the fear of these tactics will be
enough to restrict free speech. A survey of writers worldwide showed that after Snowdens leaks,
rates of self-censorship among American writers approached that of writers in nondemocratic,
authoritarian countries.

Some critics of domestic surveillance argue that the current programs provide more information than
law enforcement agencies can effectively process. They also contend that a lack of major terrorist
attacks on the United States during the life of the NSAs programs is not proof of the programs
effectiveness. Furthermore, they argue that relying on digital information collection and sharing
between intelligence agencies has failed to stop major attacks in the past and will fail to stop attacks in
the future. To support this argument, critics point to the fact that intelligence agencies had information
on perpetrators who committed terrorist attacks at the Boston Marathon and on Charlie Hedbo in Paris
before the attacks occurred, yet law enforcement failed to use the information they had to stop these
attacks from happening.

Lastly, many opponents of domestic surveillance argue that the practice hurts the American
technology industry. They insist that because the NSA has inserted back doors into much American-
made hardware, large foreign firms are less likely to purchase American computer systems. Many
American technology companies, including Microsoft, Apple, and Cisco, claim to have suffered serious
financial losses after the American surveillance programs were revealed.

Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning.

Source Citation
"Domestic Surveillance." Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2015. Opposi
ng Viewpoints in Context, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/PC3010999317/OVIC?u=h
kis&xid=806bf365. Accessed 14 Mar. 2017.

Gale Document Number: GALE|PC3010999317