Ask for Permission

When Judge Murray Gurfein ruled in 1971 that The New York Times should be allowed to publish The Pentagon Papers, he wrote:

The security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the value of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, an ubiquitous press, must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know. These are troubled times. There is no greater safety valve for discontent and cynicism about the affairs of government than freedom of expression in any form. (Policinski)

In 2013, we are still living in troubled times.  We continue to be at war with terror, and our national security is threatened.  However our individual security is also at risk.  We all have the right to freedom of expression, yet government inspection of our personal communications threatens that freedom.  The government cannot justly take away this freedom.  The only proper means for us to lose freedom of expression is by our own decision to give it up.  If government officials believe that there is a critical need to monitor our communication, they should ask us for permission.  Any such permission that we grant should expire as soon as the crisis expires.

Now of course, we have a representative government.  The NSA does not have to poll every American in order monitor phone records.  The Obama administration claims that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) provides legal authorization for the NSA’s activities, and that Congress has proper oversight.  In theory these practices would provide the permission that the NSA needs.  

However, the FISC has been approving every request “for authority to conduct electronic surveillance and/or physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes” (McCauley 2).  This court operates in secret, but it is evident that it never opposes the government’s requests.  Also, as Senator Ron Wyden said in 2012, “The public has absolutely no idea what the court is actually saying. What it means is the country is in fact developing a secret body of law so Americans have no way of finding out how their laws and Constitution are being interpreted” (McCauley 6).  That is, because nearly all of the court’s proceedings are classified, we have no way of knowing the legal basis for the court’s decisions.  Anyone can read the actual text of the Patriot Act and other relevant legislation.  However, what truly matters is the interpretation and application of those laws, and these are being done in secret.  We should bring this out into the open.

Works cited:

McCauley, Lauren. "Secret Spy Court Authorizes 100% of US Government Requests." Global Research. Centre for Research on Globalization, 5 May 2013. Web. 23 June 2013. <http://www.globalresearch.ca/secret-spy-court-authorizes-100-of-us-government-requests/5334012>.

Policinski, Gene. "Freedom to Gather News at the Heart of AP Phone Debate." Newseum, 23 May 2013. Web. 23 June 2013. <http://www.newseum.org/news/2013/05/freedom-to-gather-news-at-the-heart-of-ap-phone-debate.html>.