1. According to P. Williams as she wrote in her essay that the war on terror is a new type of war because ‘the war of terrorism is a war of the mind so broadly defined that the enemy becomes anybody who makes us afraid.’ What she means here is that the war against terrorism is a war against a civilian enemy. It’s different from other traditional wars. After all, the war she is describing is a battle of the mind in which constantly had to look over our shoulders everywhere we go because anyone could be any enemy; for example, when you go to the train you don’t feel safe, I know I don’t feel safe I constantly feel like I have to be aware of my surroundings because this city is full of chaos and the traditional wars are like when countries be politically having wars because of land, the news is full of negativity with a crime in our society happening every day.
2. The ‘Roving Wiretaps’ of the Patriot seems to violate the Bill of Rights by violating the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment states, ‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause. The ‘Roving wiretaps’ violate that amendment because Civil liberties groups say the language of the Patriot Act could lead to privacy violations for anyone who comes into casual contact with the suspect. They want Congress to require investigators to specify just which device is going to be tapped, or that the suspect is identified, to protect the innocent from unwarranted snooping.
3. ‘Sneek and Peek’ warrants allow for “delayed notice” of search warrants, which means the FBI can search a home or business without immediately notifying the target of the investigation. The Justice Department says this provision has already allowed investigators to search the houses of drug dealers and other criminals without providing notice that might have jeopardized an investigation. The ‘sneak and peek’ act also violates the 4th amendment because they are doing searches and seizures without an actual warrant to show the residents of a home or even a resident.

P. Williams writes in her essay, that the war on terror is a new type of war. What’s new about it, how is it different from traditional wars? 

A war against terrorism is a mental conflict, with the enemy being anyone who instills fear in us. In fact, one striking aspect of current American public conversation is how challenging it is to discuss facts rather than fear . We must take great care to prevent human rights from being viewed as an indulgence in a struggle that is tinged with a certain amount of social fear.

In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why? 

The Roving Wiretaps of the Patriot Act seems to violate the Bill of Rights by violating the privacy of anybody who has a passing interaction with the suspect . This violates the fourth amendment, which states that a search must be authorized by a warrant and be based on reasonable suspicion that the subject has committed or is about to commit a crime . It also violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free expression.

What about “Sneak and Peek” Warrants? 

The Sneak and Peek Warrants permit the FBI to examine a residence or place of business without immediately informing the subject of the investigation, this section permits “delayed notice” of search warrants . According to the Justice Department, this clause has already permitted investigators to search the homes of drug dealers and other criminals without giving them a warning that could have jeopardized an investigation.

1. P. Williams writes in her essay, that the war on terror is a new type of a war. What’s new about it, how is it different from traditional wars?

What was new was the framing of the war as a “war on terror.” She says that we’re fighting “against unruly if deadly emotionalism” rather than a war against something more specific and concrete, with concrete goals like dismantling regime or gaining territory or access to resources. She says “A war against terrorism is a war of the mind, so broadly defined that the enemy becomes anybody who makes us afraid” and that the national struggle is colored by social panic. She says that fear is inventing a constitutional crisis due to the invasion of privacy by certain intelligence organizations, which she refers to as domestic spying.

1. In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why?

In my opinion, a roving wiretap is unconstitutional due to its violation of the Fourth Amendment. The fourth amendment protects our property and selves from search and seizure without the proper legal pre-requisites (a warrant or probable cause). They did this by replacing the need for a warrant by creating something called an NSL, a “National Security Letter.” This is a document that allows FBI agents to spy on citizens without a judge’s approval. While one can make the argument that the patriot act was constitutional specifically due to the invention of the NSL, I disagree with the premise that the invention of a document on the behalf of national security that has ushered virtually no changes and was made under a xenophobic precedent, can be constitutional exclusively by virtue of being legally installed. Between 2003 and 2005 out of 143,074 NSLs issued, 53 criminals were referred to prosecutors, none of which were terror-related. By 2006 the FBI had issued 192,499 NSLs, which led to only one terror-related conviction. According to sources, this conviction would have been made regardless of evidence found through the patriot act. It also violates our first amendment, freedom of speech as Americans who receive an NSL are prohibited from telling anyone. This is known as a “gag order.”

1. What about “Sneek and Peek” Warrants?

Sneak and peak warrants are definitely unconstitutional for the same reasons as a roving wiretap: by violating the fourth amendment. All of these decisions were made to fight terror, but had virtually no effect. But the supporters of the patriot act and sneak and peek warrants were steadfast in their decision-making because they believed regardless of catching terrorists, they were cleaning up the streets by convicting drug dealers. By making the patriot act a weapon for the war on drugs, the government was by proxy putting drug dealers and other offenders in the same position as potential terrorists. First of all, drug dealers are protected by the constitution, so are pedophiles, and so are school shooters (the latter being an act of domestic terrorism). This is not a game of pick and choose. If we applied this constitutional violation to all politicians who knows how much of Washington would’ve gone to jail for tax evasion? What about prostitution? What about bribery? What about environmental and humanitarian violations? What hypocrisy. I’m not advocating for these people to go to jail because our country may turn to turmoil without central leadership, but I also happen to recognize the importance of drug sales for the US economy. At the end of the day, I wouldn’t advocate for the arrest or search of anyone without due process.

1. P. Williams writes in her essay, that the war on terror is a new type of a war. What’s new about it, how is it different from traditional wars?
2. It is new that war of terror is a war of mind versus war against specific bodies, specific land, and specific resources. As P. Williams states within her essay, there is always a certain hypnosis to the language of war in which war means peace and peace-mongering invites war. It is different from traditional wars as with this being a war of mind, the enemy becomes anybody who makes us afraid.
4. In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why?
5. The Roving Wiretaps of the Patriot act seems to violate the Bill of Rights by the Justice Department has long complained about restrictions that required separate court authorizations for each device used by the target of an investigation. However, the roving wiretaps are allowed against suspected spies and terrorists. This violates it as citizens believe that the language of the Patriot Act could lead to privacy violations of anyone who comes into casual contact with the suspect. The amendment it seems to violate is the fourth amendment as it sits at the boundary between general individual freedoms and the rights of those suspected of crimes.
7. What about “Sneek and Peek” Warrants?
8. Sneek and Peek of the Patriot Act as well seems to violate the Bill of Rights by critics saying the provision allows the use of “sneak and peek” warrants for even minor crimes, not just terror and espionage cases. The amendment that seems to be violated by the sneek and peek warrants is the fourth amendment as well.

1. She goes onto explain, how much has changed since 9/11 occurred. How we have been deprived of our own privacy along with “wide spread ethnic profiling”. The way we lost our freedom of speech, but it is different than traditional wars because it has not only affected the people fighting but the whole country itself. Along, with so many different ethnicities, but also how nobody is safe. Yes, in war nobody is ever safe but this not only changed one nation but various other countries along with brought on so much more protection to a point where even we get viewed as suspicious to our own government.
2. I would say “roving wiretaps” violates the bill of rights towards the 4th amendment. It states how one should feel safe in their own homes or with their own property without being violated. It ends up becoming a true violation of ones privacy.
3. Sneak and peek warrants are also an invasion of privacy. Yes to the pro in the cases of drug crimes but imagine to cases like what occurred to Breonna Taylor where the police just ran into her place. That case is the perfect example of how things could have been prevented to avoid someone losing their life due to incorrect information.

1.  According to P. Williams, the war on terror is not wars against military organizations with other countries which is considered the traditional wars, but rather this new war against terror is a “war against the civilian mind”, it is a battle of the mind. The civilian can be anybody who belong to an organization that uses violence to achieve its means. And because this civilian enemy can be anyone, this makes people afraid and become vigilant of people around them. Unlike traditional wars, one can tell if you’re losing or winning the battle, but with this new type of war against terror, one can’t keep score of who is winning or losing, and this can keep the war going for a very long time if not forever.

2.  The Roving Wiretaps allows one wiretap court order to cover multiple devices, eliminating the need for different court orders for all devices that a person own. This violates the 4^th amendment which protects the citizens right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. It also violates the rights to privacy because Roving Wiretaps allows the government to eavesdrop on people conservations without their consents.

3. The “ Sneak and Peek” warrants allow authorities to search the properties of individuals without notifying the person, or anyone present at the time of the search. This violates the 4^th amendment which says that the government is not allowed to search an individual home or property without providing notice and making sure that someone is present during the search.

1. P. Williams writes in her essay, that the war on terror is a new type of a war. What’s new about it, how is it different from traditional wars?

  But in this war targets are often unarmed civilians, rather than the people who fight for our country. Aiming at civilians is causing more of an impact. They want their point to be heard so aiming at civilians does that because it is causing fear. 

2. In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why?

Roving wiretaps violates the bill of rights due to privacy. Government is giving the power to basically spy on citizens’ internet activity to even a call one may get. Which is the right of freedom of speech. Another right that is being violated is the fourth amendment due to the fact that they are allowing government officials to allow sneak and peek warrants when in the constitution it states the government cannot obtain a conduct search without obtaining a warrant and having proof of probable cause to believe that the person has committed or plan on committing the alleged crime.

3.What about “Sneak and Peek” Warrants?

Sneak and peek warrants are warrants that allow authorities to search the homes and property  without being notified or informed.  Sneak and peek warrants violate the fourth amendment as I mentioned in question 2. Warrants should be provided to government officials who are able to prove the alleged person did the crime or is planning too. 

In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why?

The roving wiretaps of the Patriot Act gives the government access to conduct Records searches, Secret searches, Intelligence searches and “Trap and trace” searches. This violates our bill of rights because this should only be used by government for enemies of the state. However, the government is using this for American citizens. The Fourth Amendment say that the government cannot conduct a search without obtaining a warrant and showing probable cause to believe that the person has committed or will commit a crime. Second it violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech by prohibiting the recipients of search orders from telling others about those orders, even where there is no real need for secrecy. Third it violates the First Amendment by effectively authorizing the FBI to launch investigations of American citizens in part for exercising their freedom of speech. Lastly, it also violates the Fourth Amendment by failing to provide notice. Notice is also a key element of due process, which is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.

What about “Sneek and Peek” Warrants?

Sneak and peek warrants also violate the fourth amendment due to the failure to provide notice. Notices should be given within a reasonable, but short time. The time should not exceed 7 days except upon a strong showing of necessity.

Veronica Gonzalez

POL 100 (0504) – Intro. to American Govt. – Fall 2022

Discussion Board 9.2

Q1. According to P. Williams, the war on terror is a new type of war because it is  not in a sense a physical tangible terror but a terror of emotions, mainly fear and panic. According to P. Williams, “the war has been framed as one against “terror” – against unruly if deadly emotionalism – rather than as a war against specific bodies, specific land, specific resources (pg. 2)”. This new war on terror seeks to use human emotion, specifically fear, panic and the “what if” mentality in guiding the government to protect its citizens and power to the extremes of committing  civil rights and liberties violations not only of US citizens but to also violating the human rights of non-citizens in general. What is different about this new war on terror is that, it is a war that is geared towards causing social panic by playing on the fears and emotions of the people and that what we don’t understand and scares us becomes sufficient enough of a reason to report as being anti-government and terroristic. 

Q2.  The “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights, specifically the 4th Amendment rights of citizens to be protected from illegal search and seizures, right to privacy and arbitrary intrusion of the government without justifiable cause to do so. 

Q3. “Sneak and Peek” warrants allow authorities to search the homes and property of individuals without being notified or informed. The 4th Amendment protects against such an arbitrary procedure, “and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” According to the Patriot Act, these Sneak and Peek warrants can be used not just for espionage and terrorism cases, but can be misused to include even minor crimes for which the original intent of hte Patriot Act was not meant for.

1. P. Williams writes in her essay, that the war on terror is a new type of a war. What’s new about it, how is it different from traditional wars?

The war on terror is different from traditional wars in a number of ways. First, it is a war against a non-state actor, Al-Qaeda. Second, it is a war that is being fought in many different countries, not just on traditional battlefields. Third, it is a war that relies heavily on intelligence and law enforcement, rather than traditional military methods. Fourth, it is a war in which the targets are often civilians, rather than military targets. Finally, it is a war in which there is no clear end in sight. 

2.In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why?

“Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights in a number of ways. First and foremost, the act allows the government to conduct warrantless searches and seizures. The act also gives the government powers to monitor Internet activity and track the online activity of Americans. The “Roving Wiretaps” provision could allow the government to eavesdrop on private conversations without any justification. This could have a chilling effect on free speech and free association. 

3.What about “Sneek and Peek” Warrants?

It would appear that the component of the Patriot Act known as “Sneek and Peek” warrants violates the rule in Fourth Amendment. This provision authorizes the government to conduct covert searches of private residences and commercial establishments without first obtaining the consent of the building’s residents. It’s possible that this would give the government the ability to conduct searches without providing any cause. The section of the warrants known as “Sneek and Peek” appears to violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom to speak one’s mind as well as the ability to associate with others.