Search Warrants Eliminate Privacy

Regan, Priscilla M. “Communication Privacy: Transmitting Our Messages.” Legislating Privacy. Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press, 1995. 109-143. Netlibrary. Web. 19 April, 2011.

Read this eBook Review

In chapter 5 of her book, Legislating Privacy, Regan speaks of our communication privacy and the transmission of our messages. She immediately brings up a Supreme Court case from 1928, Olmstead vs. United States. Olmstead was a bootlegger during prohibition that had most of the evidence against him obtained through the government wiretapping. He pleaded that the 4th and 5th amendments gave him privacy of his communications and that the evidence obtained through wiretapping shouldn’t be admissible. The court ruled 2 to 1 that wiretapping is not a violation of the 4th or 5th amendments and that the evidence is admissible. Regan uses this example perfectly to get her point of view across. Just because we can now email and instant message without ever saying a word out loud, doesn’t mean that those messages have any more right to privacy than our phone conversations do. Regan states that Americans have this false idea that they are entitled to privacy within their communications, but in reality if a search warrant is obtained the government can get access to your emails just like they wiretapped Olmstead in the 1920’s.

This chapter makes the research question seem a lot less controversial and therefore makes picking a side significantly easier. It seems that the only down side toward the government taking steps to better protect Americans from cyber threats, is the reduction of our privacy from the government. This chapter however, challenges the notion that we have any privacy to begin with. Of course the government can’t sift through each and every conversation that Americans have because of the laws and time constraints. However, with a search warrant, the government officials with organizations like the C.I.A. can search for and use information they please. Adding to the security of American citizens online wouldn’t really change any of this, except that it would make it easier for this policing to take place. So really, after reading this chapter in Regan’s book, the audience understands that there is really only one side to this issue. Adequate protection from cyber threats should be a priority by our government because “the privacy” that they seem to be taking away, doesn’t really exist in the first place.