American Government: Examining Security vs. Civil Liberties Post 9/11

This essay analyzes the ongoing debate between national security and civil liberties within the American government, particularly in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. It examines the perspectives presented in both an article and a film, highlighting the importance of balancing government powers, such as wiretapping, with the protection of individual rights outlined in the Bill of Rights. The essay discusses the roles of the Congress, the executive branch, and security agencies, including the NSA, and their impact on civil liberties, including the implications of metadata collection and the FISA court. It emphasizes the need for limitations on government power and the importance of open debate while acknowledging the need for government secrecy in certain situations. The essay draws upon the works of Stuart Taylor Jr., Edward Snowden, and others to explore how these issues have reshaped the relationship between security and freedom in the United States.

Running head: AMERICAN GOVERNMEMNT
American Government
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1AMERICAN GOVERNMEMNT
The sense of security has been discussed in various ways in the article as well as the film.
In the article, it has been written that all the powers like administrators, Congress and Supreme
Court should tighten up the limitations on the enforcement of laws and overall powers of the
intelligence agencies (Taylor Jr, 2003). The wiretapping powers of the government must be
increased in this context again. In the film, it has been stressed that the sense of security
measures differs from the perspectives of libertarian and progressive leftist powers. These things
should be kept in mind regarding security measures in the post 9/11 world.
The author of the article Stuart Taylor believes that some rights mentioned in the Bill of
Rights should be provided with more restrictions. These limitations are indeed crucial for the
wiretapping powers of the government that should be controlled even more (Waldron, 2017).
Still, excessive power in this scenario will be problematic for the civil liberties among the
common people. The adherence to the civil liberties must not be stubborn at any point of time.
This will cause the damages in the civil freedoms of the common people (Taylor Jr, 2003). The
security agencies should work secretly in the dangerous situations and it is not always necessary
for them to reveal the outcomes of their missions. The Congress should make these secret
investigations more strict and limited access should be into the information by the government
only (Goitein & Patel, 2015). The Congress should pose more limits on the open national debates
otherwise the civil liberty or national security might be at great risk indeed. “Considered
Congressional action based on open national debates is more likely to be sensitive to civil
liberties and to the Constitution’s checks and balances than unilateral expansion of executive
power” (Taylor Jr, 2003).
In the article, the author Stuart Taylor has discussed about the limitations on some issues
that might pose a threat to the overall civil liberties of the common people. The Congress must

2AMERICAN GOVERNMEMNT
be using some means so the limitations can be there on some actions. This would help to
segregate the powers between three branches of the government. No single branch will have
influence on the common people. Previously, the executive branch of the government had the
most powers but it is better for all the branches to have equal amount of powers. There are some
advantages of this perspective. People can have better access to know all the events that take
place across the country (Taylor Jr, 2003). The civil liberties can be reassessed systematically in
this context. Otherwise, it would really be problematic for the government to deal with secret
missions. The detention and investigative powers of the government will thus be strengthened.
On the contrary, common people will not get access about the broader investigative powers of
the government (Waldron, 2017). The balance between security and liberty will face many
problems in this regard.
From the film, it has been found that metadata collection by NSA has gone on to violate
the 4th Amendment. Edward Snowden, a member of National Security Agency (NSA) revealed
that government collected the metadata of all telephonic calls through Verizon (Cook, 2016).
The call recording process of communication was a hammer blow to the civil liberties of the
common. Later on, NSA justified their actions by saying they did not record the overall contents
of calls. FISA Court is based on Foreign Intelligence Security Act (Taylor Jr, 2003). The court
provides warrants to the Attorney General and then government could take actions on the foreign
terrorists. The shaky warrant applications from the FBI would definitely prevent the FISA court
to provide the warrants.

3AMERICAN GOVERNMEMNT
References
Cook, B. (2016). The New FISA Court Amicus Should Be Able to Ignore Its Congressionally
Imposed Duty. Am. UL Rev., 66, 539.
Goitein, E., & Patel, F. (2015). What went wrong with the FISA Court. Brennan Center for
Justice at the New York University School of Law.
Taylor Jr, S. (2003). Rights, liberties, and security. The Brookings Review, 21(1), 25.
Waldron, J. (2017). Security and liberty: The image of balance. In Civil Rights and Security (pp.
3-22). Routledge.