Michael Fortune

For many critics, this raised a red flag.

Was our right to privacy being compromised in the name of security?

Fast forward to just a few years ago, between 2020 and early 2022.

The FBI found itself in hot water for conducting over 278,000 warrantless searches under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA.

They were looking into individuals connected to protests, journalists, and even members of Congress.

This sounds alarming, doesn't it?

The potential for abuse is enormous when the lines of oversight and accountability start to blur.

In fact, the ACLU, a pivotal player in defending civil liberties, took a stand against the NSA's bulk phone metadata collection program.

In 2015, they argued that such massive surveillance efforts violated our Fourth Amendment rights.

And it doesn't stop there.

Consider the infamous no-fly list, which has bloated to nearly one million names since 9-11.

Numerous innocent individuals find themselves trapped in a bureaucratic nightmare with no clear justification for being flagged.

That raises serious questions about how many more lives are affected by overreach and how many mistakes remain uncorrected.

Amidst this, perspectives are sharply divided.

Supporters of these surveillance measures argue that they are essential tools against terrorism and that we need to put safety first.

We must engage in this dialogue to ensure we do not sacrifice our civil liberties standing still.

Historical contexts remind us that periods of national upheaval often lead to heightened surveillance.

Back in the Cold War era, for instance, extensive monitoring targeted suspected communists and civil rights activists alike.

The Church Committee in 1975 exposed serious abuses and paved the way for FISA, an earnest attempt to provide oversight.

Are we witnessing history repeat itself with today's surveillance culture?