The paper "Senator Rand Paul Plans to Sue the President by Charlie Savage" is a delightful example of an article on politics. Senator Rand feature as one of the latest politicians to join an increasing crowd of Tea Party activists in opposition to calling surveillance programs by the US federal governmental agencies. The call surveillance program, which was brought into effect by the Foreign Intelligence Court, is a program that collects phone-call records in America. The leading governmental actors involved in implementing the program are the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
Both actors play a significant role in conducting national and international intelligence collection as a means of securing America from domestic and external acts of aggression and terrorism. Apart from the two agencies mentioned above, there are other non-governmental stakeholders including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. This court comprises of a 15-judge bench mandated to handle cases revolving around international intelligence programs. In 2006, this non-governmental actor authorized the use of Call Surveillance by the American federal government. Based on the article, it is undeniable that the senator’ s case falls under the larger issue of freedom restriction and extra-judicial killings.
Similar to Rand’ s case, all other stakeholders making the increasing plaintiffs team are concerned about the legality of conducting targeted drone killings, especially when call surveillance features as the basis of justifying such actions. Conventionally, every story contains multiple sides. The plaintiff opposing implementation of call surveillance program claims that the federal government is stepping out of its constitutional mandates. Rand Paul argues that the program is unconstitutional and violates certain clauses of the laws, especially the Fourth Amendment.
On the contrary, the defendant, in this case, Obama’ s administration, claims that the program is legal based on the previous ruling by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. With respect to the stages of policy processes, the call surveillance program is currently in the implementation step. This is based on the fact that the FBI and NSA are currently using the program in conducting its investigations, both at domestic and international levels. The Justice Department has already issued orders directing phone companies to record all phone calls. After reading the news article, I am of the opinion that the call surveillance program violates the fundamental rights of American citizens.
The fact that the Justice Department has appealed the earlier ruling by the Supreme Court indicates that recording of phone calls lies contrary to certain inherent amendments in the American constitution. In this regard, it is undeniable that there are no missing facts about the case because all plaintiffs are presenting their arguments from similar perspectives.