Government invades the privacy of individuals by utilizing its different agencies and using them to undertake tasks beyond their scope of functions. After the 9/11 attack, the U.S. government approached a proactive security strategy that was influenced by the need to protect the wellbeing of individuals against a dedicated terrorist front with roots deep in the Middle East. From this realization, every Muslim in the U.S. became a potential target, a move that exposed them to racial discrimination orchestrated by the moves undertaken by different agencies in their surroundings. Institutions such as the National Security Agency (NSA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) among others provided the government with a leeway to encroach the privacy of the Islamic population group in the U.S. and beyond. For this reason, tapping people’ phones breaches the right to privacy, which is guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment by requiring state agencies to have a compelling interest that supports their actions.
Population groups affected by the government’s decision to infiltrate their privacy can become polarized and engage in retaliatory activities because of their inability to overturn the government’s decision through the criminal justice system. Through the adverse experiences triggered by the oppressive moves, it is easier for the risk population groups to be radicalized because of their inability to survive under the discriminatory environment that limits their access to employment opportunities and other aspects of life in their surroundings (Farrell & Newman, 2019). Therefore, some of the oppressed community groups believe that the U.S. is justified to experience the consequences of terrorism because of their military invasion in their home countries that not only ruins their family relations but also their cultural heritage.
As a policymaker, I would advise the government to conduct a series of extensive investigations to single out persons of interest from the rest of the Islamic population to demonstrate the nature of their intentions to the rest of the world (Farrell & Newman, 2019). By so doing, the country will create meaningful relations with the affected population groups and involve them in their operations that are supposed to restore peace and tranquility to the country. By upholding the rights enshrined in the Fourteenth amendment, engaging different actors in the criminal justice system will yield favorable outcomes that benefit the entire operation.
When affected population groups understand the meaning of the efforts undertaken by the government to protect their wellbeing, they can express their interest to contribute to the programs because of their understanding and positive experience with the government agencies. However, considering the discriminatory treatment meted on the risk groups, it becomes difficult to extract any information that could be used to improve outcomes in the contemporary environment (Pearlstein, 2017). From this realization, creating an enabling environment where the risk population group can be treated equally with their white counterparts presents a perfect opportunity for the government to review its approaches in resolving the rising cases of insecurity.
Tapping citizens’ phones is a breach of privacy, which is guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment by requiring state agencies to have a compelling interest that supports their actions. Over the years, the U.S. government has been accused of invading the privacy of its Islamic citizens without providing a compelling interest to demonstrate the intent of their actions. However, the government can still protect its people and uphold the constitution by adhering to the different rights entitled to its citizens.
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). Of privacy and power: The transatlantic struggle over freedom and security. Princeton University Press.
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). 2. Domestic Security and Privacy in the Transatlantic Space. In Of Privacy and Power (pp. 39-68). Princeton University Press.
Pearlstein, D. (2017). Before Privacy, Power: The Structural Constitution. J. Nat’l Sec. L. & Pol’y, 9, 159.