Balancing Individual Privacy Rights and Intelligence Needs

2011 ◽  
pp. 180-196
Author(s):  
Kathleen S. Hartzel ◽  
Patrick E. Deegan

This chapter explores how individuals using different justice perspectives to evaluate the appropriateness of the USA PATRIOT Act will logically arrive at different views on the fairness of the legislation. Some pundits believe the USA PATRIOT Act creates an increased risk for the privacy rights of US citizens. Excerpts from both Department of Justice and ACLU documents concerning the USA PATRIOT Act are presented. An analysis of these excerpts suggests that the Department of Justice applies a procedural justice perspective to demonstrate the fairness of the Act in terms of the way the law will be applied. The ACLU applies an outcome-based justice perspective that focuses on the potential for the Act to disproportionately penalize specific demographic groups. Different justice perspectives lead to different fairness judgments.

2011 ◽  
pp. 2557-2566
Author(s):  
Kathleen S. Hartzel ◽  
Patrick E. Deegan

This chapter explores how individuals using different justice perspectives to evaluate the appropriateness of the USA PATRIOT Act will logically arrive at different views on the fairness of the legislation. Some pundits believe the USA PATRIOT Act creates an increased risk for the privacy rights of US citizens. Excerpts from both Department of Justice and ACLU documents concerning the USA PATRIOT Act are presented. An analysis of these excerpts suggests that the Department of Justice applies a procedural justice perspective to demonstrate the fairness of the Act in terms of the way the law will be applied. The ACLU applies an outcome-based justice perspective that focuses on the potential for the Act to disproportionately penalize specific demographic groups. Different justice perspectives lead to different fairness judgments.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Jessica Crowe Garner

Are library privacy rights under assault again?Possibly. A new administration in Washington is sending signals that heavy-handed federal guidelines concerning library data may be on the way again. After the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington DC, a group of librarians known as the Connecticut Four stood up to onerous provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act, a brave feat but one of relative anonymity.In this new era, do libraries need a face or a campaign to elevate the fight for privacy in the eyes of the general public? This paper will argue "yes," and conclude with some thought on how such a campaign might manifest itself.


2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 66-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Fraser
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Jonathan Riley

This chapter examines the normative dimensions of liberty by relating the descriptive concept to normative theories of civil and political liberty, as well as security, defended by key thinkers in historical and contemporary debates. Purely descriptive concepts of liberty must be distinguished from normative concepts. Thomas Hobbes offered a valid descriptive concept of liberty as doing as one wishes. For John Stuart Mill, civil liberty or security must always include a basic right to do whatever one wishes, in relation to a natural domain of ‘purely self-regarding’ conduct. This chapter first considers the link between liberty and rights before discussing negative and positive liberty, civil liberty and political liberty, and the interrelationships among justice, security, and liberty. It concludes with an analysis of the right to absolute self-regarding liberty. A case study concerning the USA Patriot Act of 2001 and the war on terror is presented.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document