Business Finance
Advanced Surveillance and Countersurveillance – Case Study Position Paper

Advanced Surveillance and Countersurveillance

Henley-Putnam University

Question Description

You are to submit an explanation detailing a court case whereby, the government collected data on a group or person in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

SEC 522_Advanced Surveillance and Countersurveillance – Case Study Position Paper Length: 8 – 10 pages (not including title and references pages) Due: Week 10 (13 May) Purpose: The attacks of September 11, 2001 challenged our country in new ways. As a result there has been a nearly continuous debate on the need for surveillance versus the Constitutional aspects of the 4th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The purpose of this assignment is to identify a specific, contemporary case where a person or group’s right to privacy was at issue and within the context of that case and what you have learned in class, take a position on the issue and support that position in an informed way. Below is the case I have tasked you. Rachael – in your first paper you used Amazon’s Alexa as your example. You explored some aspects of conduct that may be in violation of the constitutional rights to privacy. Your assertion is that a voice activated sensor may hold the answer to why a person died in a hot tub. However, while the government is prosecuting, they did not commit the violation of capturing the data; a sensor is what captured it. Now, if you were to have described how sensors used by the US government were to have captured personal information in violation of such constitutional rights, we would be able to move forward US v. Jones is an example but I wouldn’t use it for final submission. You are to submit an explanation detailing a court case whereby, the government collected data on a group or person in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Pls stay on task. Description: Introduction (1/2 – 1 page): Provide an introduction that begins generally and concludes with a thesis statement that narrows a reader’s focus to the case you intend to discuss. Thesis Statement (1 – 2 sentences): In your thesis statement indicate your position on the issue (whether or not you think what happened to the person/group is justified based on your knowledge). Case Summary (2 – 3 pages): Then, go on to summarize the actual case. Provide enough information so a reader understands the issues, but do not provide more than 3 pages of summary. Position Summary (4 – 6 pages): in subsequent paragraphs, explain your position and provide evidence to support your position (this should be the longer, substantive part of your paper). As you support your position, you may want to consider the questions below as they may inform your writing. • As technology advances in capability and decreases in cost, should we as a society reduce our expectation of privacy? • Should the security of the nation be more important than the individual expectation of privacy? • Should our personal information be made publicly available to assist in tracking security threats? • Should wiretaps be legal and commonplace? • Should government agencies be given cart blanch to collect as they see fit to protect us? Why or why not? • How does the PATRIOT Act come into play with the case you identified? • How will hostile actors/terrorists utilize and counter technology, laws, procedures, and public notions of the right of privacy? Recommendation (1 – 2 pages): add a recommendation section where you advise decision-makers on how they might approach the expectation of personal privacy when there is a threat to collective security. Make sure any recommendation is consistent with the position and supportive evidence presented in the body of the paper. Conclusion/Summary (1 – 2 pages): Finally conclude the paper with a summary of the logical reasoning you presented within the paper. I do expect you to take an informed position based on what you know and provide research-based evidence that generally supports your position. Audience: A group of U.S. citizens and policy/decision makers who have interests and concerns about privacy and national security. Sources: Please provide at least four to five different sources to explain your case and support your position. Language/Format: Present your paper in a professional, academic way that addresses the designated audience. Be sure to present well-developed paragraphs that are free of grammatical error and that convey a logical flow of information. Please use the H-PU APA Guidelines for Academic Papers and the APA Example Paper Template (located under Course Resources) to develop your paper. ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Final Answer

Attached.

Running Head: THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT 1

The Fourth Amendment and Technological Advancement
Name
Instructor
Institutional Affiliation
Date

THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT

2

Introduction
Recent debates regarding the government’s increased use of technological abilities show
the challenges modern courts face when revolving around several aspects in the arena of
electronic surveillance. More than a decade ago, President Bush declared that the government
had covertly initiated vast electronic surveillance and communications seizure framework. Even
though the President argued that the Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP) was in adherence with
the federal law and the Constitution, a team of attorneys and reporters differed, and in ACLU vs.
NSA, claimed that the government unlawfully captured their communications under the pretense
of the TSP. Furthermore, in Hepting vs. AT&T, a group of citizen complainants asserted that one
of the largest telecommunication companies in the world illegally permitted the government to
capture communications and Internet data passed across its network (Davis, McGarrity,
Williams, 2014).
Technology has significantly impacted the way individuals relate to each other and with
the government. Essentially, in the digital era, technology is inevitably intertwined into the fabric
of individuals’ lives, carrying with it a massively improved ability of the government to surveil
the public. The government has substantive powerful surveillance equipment and the public,
willingly or not, have facilitated surveillance by utilizing technology that reveals a wide range of
information that is regarded private and confidential. With the changing technological
environment, the government uses technological devices to spy and intercept information, hence
interfering with individuals’ rights to privacy as stipulated in the Fourth Amendment of the US
Constitution. This paper will use the United States vs. Wurie case to describe why it’s wrong and
unlawful for the government to use technological devices to violate citizens’ rights to privacy.

THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT

3

Case Summary
United States V. Wurie
Boston police officers, on September 2007, saw a seeming drug deal inside Wurie’s
vehicle. The police went to the vehicle and found Fred Wade, a man found with the suspected
drug sale. Wade informed the police that he had bought the cocaine from ‘B,’ the owner of the
car and that he lived in South Boston. Afterward, the police detained Wurie for selling the drugs
and escorted him to the police station for interrogation. Some of the things the police confiscated
from the suspect were two cell phones. The police officers realized that one of the cell phones
kept on ringing and the number calling was indicated ‘my house’ (Davis, McGarrity, Williams,
2014).
The police unlocked the phone and viewed a picture of a child and a young woman set as
the phone’s wallpaper. Later, the police viewed the phone’s call record and determined the
number indicated ‘my house.’ After they checked a white page directory, the officers linked the
number to a zip code in South Boston, linked to the name Manny Cristal. When interrogated,
Wurie argued that he doesn’t live in South Boston but in Dorchester and refused to acknowledge
that he is involved in selling drugs. Doubted that the suspect was lying about where he lived, the
police went to the South Boston address and found ...

RyanTopTutor (21995)
Purdue University

Anonymous
Solid work, thanks.

Anonymous
The tutor was great. I’m satisfied with the service.

Anonymous
Goes above and beyond expectations !

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4
Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors