Josh Chambers - (annotated Bibliography)

Joshua Chambers 3/5/09 Political Science 202 Annotated Bibliography Bergman, Paul, Berman-Barrett, Sara. The Criminal Law Handbook. 9th ed. Berkeley, CA: Nolo Publishing, 2007. Being one of my first sources for information, this book led me to such cases as Katz vs. United States and the Patriot Act. It gave a very brief overview of the wiretapping debate, without a significant bias toward either side. It was peer reviewed by several attorneys, and legal professionals, and cited the cases that were brought up in a manner that allowed me to find them easily. I found it a good source for starting out, though technical details in the debate were provided by other means. "FISA" Pub.L. 95-511, 92 Stat. 1783, enacted October 25, 1978, 50 U.S.C. ch.36 The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed by the legislature in an effort to ensure Fourth Amendment protections without compromising too much security. It allowed warrantless wiretapping for up to one year with the proper permissions and endorsements. It set up a court specifically designed to judge whether or not to issue warrants for surveillance, called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. In addition, an appeals court was also established, called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, which ruled in favor of the Protect America Act of 2007, an amendment to the original FISA. As a law passed by Congress FISA does not have the level of constitutional force as a Supreme Court decision, but should be considered when making future court decisions. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967). Katz v. United States was a Supreme Court case that ruled in favor of extending Fourth Amendment protections to telephone wiretaps. Its primary ruling determined that people, not places, are protected under the Fourth Amendment. It is relevant in our case because of the exception it gives to matters of national security. A test of reasonableness for expectation of privacy was introduced as well, later becoming a model that most courts use today. Being a Supreme Court case, Katz v. United States has the highest level of credibility of any source. Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928). Olmstead v. United States was a Supreme Court case from 1928 that was overturned by the 1967 case Katz. v. United States. It ruled that the Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections did not apply to a telephone conversation in a public place. The credibility of this is doubtful seeing as it was overturned, but it remains a testimony to the fact that the Supreme Court has had the capability to rule in favor of limiting Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections. Risen, James and Lichtblau, Eric. “Court Affirms Wiretapping Without Warrants; [National Desk]” The New York Times Jan 16, 2009: pg. A.13 Established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act passed in 1978 by Congress, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review ruled in favor of Congress’ amendment to the original FISA bill that would give the executive branch the complete power to wiretap in the name of national security (The Protect America Act of 2007) This article about the FISC case is written by a journalist for the New York Times, a well known and established newspaper with sufficient credibility for a case such as this. United States v. Montoya De Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531, 538 (1985). United States v. Montoya De Hernandez was a court case that upheld the border search exception to the Fourth Amendment requirement for the government to refrain from searching personal possessions and property without a warrant. A woman was caught at the border with illegal drugs in her alimentary canal, but claimed Fourth Amendment protections prevented the government from performing the initial search. The court upheld the border search exception, authorizing government officials to check all material that comes and goes across our international borders. United States v. Ramsey, 431 U.S. 606 (1977). United States v. Ramsey was a crucial court case that extended the applications of the border search exception to all international postal mail. This case gives substantiation to the argument that the border search exception can be applied to searches of possessions and property without the sender or recipient present at the search itself. Those that would apply the border search exception to the NSA warrantless surveillance program argue that there is little substantial difference between postal mail and oral or digital communication. As a Supreme Court case, this holds ultimate authority and credibility to where it can be effectively applied. United States v. U.S. District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972) US. v. U.S. District court was a Supreme court case that ruled against domestic wiretaps by government officials. I am using this case because of the explicit exception it gave to matters of national security. In this case, there were three alleged conspirators plotting against the government. They had not committed any crimes, but were monitored by a warrantless wiretap based on previous suspicion. Even though there was evidence of their conspiracy, the Court ruled in favor of preserving Fourth Amendment rights. This is a case I expect our opponents to refer to in their presentation.