POLS-1100-400

Prof. Greer
Persuasive Essay
Sterling Hite

Introduction
Terrorism has an effect on lives around the globe. To fight terrorism extreme measures must
sometimes be implemented. Sometimes extreme measures can push the boundaries of one of our
nations most revered documents, the Constitution.
There have been many acts of terrorism in the U.S. throughout its history with the most recent
nationally recognized incident being the attack on the world trade center. This single act has had a great
influence on our nations leaders to take new measures to protect our nation. Some of these changes in
the methods used to insure national security have been receiving much controversy because many
people feel that they are fringing on unconstitutional.
Is the war on terror (WOT) violating the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution? Even if the new
enactments and changes to homeland security protocols do not directly violate the constitution, do they
undermine the constitution and degrade its power? If a set of lawful allowances are made to circumvent
a master set of laws then the master set of laws lose their power. If our government is able to simply go
around the rules to achieve their goals, then how are we as their citizens to trust that them to uphold
our civil rights.

Policy Changes Due to Acts of Terrorism

The Patriot Act. Perhaps the most well-known and controversial change to policy occurred
after the 911 incident is the Patriot Act. There is much controversy surrounding the Patriot Act and
other implemented protocols that beg the questions as to the dangers they pose to the rights of

Americans. The Patriot Act essentially gives law enforcement the ability to use methods of spying on
electronic communications such as wire-taps ("Overview of the Patriot Act | Patriot Act," n.d.). Section
416 expands on the foreign student tracking system which requires the student database to include
information on the date and port of entry and it authorizes the Attorney General to permit flight
schools, language training schools, and vocational schools to participate in the expanded program ("USA
PATRIOT Act of 2001: A Summary of the Anti-Terrorism Law's Immigration-Related Provisions | Center
for Immigration Studies," n.d.).
The Patriot act and certain provisions were set to expire but were extended and renewed
multiple times ("Post-9/11 Changes By the U.S. Government," n.d.). Here is a basic list of objectives the
Patriot Act covers:

The Patriot Act allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to
investigate organized crime and drug trafficking.

The Patriot Act facilitated information sharing and cooperation among government
agencies so that they can better "connect the dots.

The Patriot Act updated the law to reflect new technologies and new threats.

The Patriot Act increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes.

Everyone wants to feel secure and would like to see an end to terrorism but, at what cost. Is it
reasonable to assume terrorism can be exterminated or even mostly contained while keeping within the
boundaries of the laws that already exist?

Homeland security. There have been some upgrades to homeland security policies which
include: expanded information sharing, the formation of the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting
Initiative, "If You See Something Say Something" campaign, Visa Security Program, National

Cybersecurity Protection System, and one that most of us are familiar with is the beefing up of airline
security ("Post-9/11 Changes By the U.S. Government," n.d.).

Military tribunals. Bush signed an order that changed the status of foreign charged with
terrorism from POWs to illegal enemy combatants which means that they go to Guantanamo and are
tried by the military. Military tribunals are much different than a civilian court trial in that allowances for
admittance of evidence are much more open, and that the trial may even progress without the presence
of the defendant ("Post-9/11 Changes By the U.S. Government," n.d.).

Go it alone defense doctrine. This is a doctrine that allows the U.S. to act preemptively
against a threat even in cases where there is not solid evidence that forces are mobilizing. This was
referred to as an international hunting license ("Post-9/11 Changes By the U.S. Government," n.d.).

The Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states: The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Hubert, 2008).
The fourth amendment is pretty straight forward. Basically we have a right to privacy unless
there is a valid, supported reason otherwise. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate whether or not our
Fourth Amendment rights are being degraded, or strengthened, by the steps taken by our government
to combat the war on terror. To determine if this indeed is the case we must analyze the collected data.

Effects on Our Rights by the WOT

While reading about all of the enactments and policy changes one can notice that a term that is
repeated over and over and throughout is foreign. All of the material that has been covered focuses

on people of recent foreign origin, or contact with persons currently foreign. However, the bulk of the
new protocols are quite invasive which is in conflict with our Constitution. This not only puts the morals
and ethics of our country up for scrutiny by other countries but also installs a sense of insecurity and
doubt by U.S. citizens that these new protocols wont be redirected toward them. Some of the changes,
chiefly the Patriot Act, provides law enforcement a means of obtaining information such a way that
would infringe on our rights. In other words, the new laws make it possible for law enforcement to
invade our privacy and therefore the new laws do erode our Fourth Amendment rights.

Conclusion
Although the information in this essay shows that there are no clear direct violations of the
Fourth Amendment, it does show that new enactments such as the Patriot Act have been made
specifically to circumvent the constitution for the purpose of combating the WOT. While the reasoning
behind the actions may seem justified, it in reality does undermine the Constitution and threaten its
power to protect U.S. citizens. The WOT has eroded our Fourth Amendment protections by installing
laws that enable law enforcement to do the very things that the 4th Amendment is supposed to protect
us from. When in pursuit of criminals we abandon our laws we then ourselves become criminals, and
when in the company of criminals there is no protection of rights.

Works Cited
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.patriotact.com/overview-of-the-patriot-act/.
(n.d.). Retrieved from Post-9/11 Changes By the U.S. Government. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.infoplease.com/us/history/911-anniversary-government-changes.html.
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/highlights.htm
Hubert, D. (2008). Introduction to U.S. National Government and Politics.
(Hubert, 2008)
(htt1)