Research Paper

8 November, 2017

I. Introduction

A. Hook or attention grabber

The United States’ Bill of Rights was enacted to protect and advocate for individual liberties and as well limit the powers of the government as far as unwarranted searches are concerned.

B. Information about the topic

Privacy advocates emphasize the need for the government to create awareness and reeducate the citizens regarding the control measures that have been stemmed in the effort to collect security information from the people. As more of people’s private information becomes digitized and as more people become social media-saturated, the question arises as to what extent have the basic protections went in protecting the citizens from privacy breaches. For instance, what are the provisions of the First Constitutional Amendment and how much freedom does it grand government agencies as far as online content is concerned? More so, as people continue to use different communication platforms that have been presented by technology for our convenience, it is important to ask whether the digital communications such as emails are protected from unlawful seizers and searches under the Fourth Amendment (Mendel 128).

C. Thesis statement

According to Bill of Rights, people has rights to enjoy online freedom, security and unauthorized search and seizures.

II. Body paragraph

A. First point: According to research and Bill of Rights people has rights to enjoy online freedom.

· It is on this basis that advocates for online protection have suggested Cyber Bill of Rights as essential to making sure that people have enjoyed online freedom and security (Kosseff 188).

B. Second point: People has right to enjoy security and unauthorized search and seizures.

i. How the Fourth Amendment provisions on search and seizures apply when it comes to the increasing government security issues

ii. The application of the Fifth Amendment when it comes to a situation whereby people are asked if they should turn over thumbprints or passwords when they are required by justice officers to do so.

II. Conclusion

There is a heated debate regarding what comprises a reasonable search and the operations that are being done by security officers in the United States today. The court, therefore, needs to revisit this matter and craft laws that ensure that all the actions and proceedings of security agencies are characterized by oversight and transparency (Raul 66). For instance, those searched should be told and made to understand what activities were done during the search and what happens to the information after the search is conducted. This is especially important because people have on many occasions complained of unreasonable searches and particularly when the scope of the search is considerably broad that no specific information is targeted (Fisher 44).

Work Cited

Raul, Alan. The Privacy, Data Protection and Cyber security Law Review, Law Business Research Ltd. 2014.

Locke, Gary. Cyber security, Innovation and the Internet Economy, The Department of Commerce. (2011).

Fisher, Mary Jo. The adequacy of protections for the privacy of Australians online. The Senate, 2011.

Kosseff, Jeff. Cyber security law. John Wiley & Sons, 2017.

Mendel, Toby. Global survey on Internet privacy and freedom of expression. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 2012.