In Clayman vs Obama, Judge Richard echoed that surveillance and collection of telephony data by NSA without the knowledge of the general public was against the spirit of the constitution of America. He said that the right to privacy is a right that needs to be guaranteed by the state. The right should not be taken away from the persons by the state. In another ruling ten days after the first one, J. William in ACLU vs Clapper arrived at a diametrically opposite decision with a different reasoning. The judge appreciated the right to privacy as envisioned under the constitution but argued that the value of intelligence outweighed the right.
In the United States of America, the people are protected by a group of laws called the Constitution. The very first of these laws is “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (US Constitution) This decree states that for no reason may the government restrict the right of free speech to the people. Free speech is sort of like your opinion on matters.
Libertarianism is the position I wish to defend, and thus will argue that, indeed, we do have free will. Libertarians believe that free will exists. Libertarians think the will is free when a choice can be made that is not determined or necessitated by prior
One of the flaws that the opposition notices is that in way shield laws afford extra privileges to journalists and that no citizen should be able to ignore a court ordered subpoena. Simply put, journalist would be placed above the law. Justice Department Official John Ashcroft stated that “reporters today are driven by their editors to deliver tersely written “scoops” usually whispered to them by individuals with political or self-serving agendas who refuse to be identified” and that they “should ultimately be held accountable for acting recklessly and irresponsibly. Allowing journalist this privilege would only further allow them you be able to utilize non-credible sources. Opponents also cite problems with defining who is considered a journalist or news gatherer and who is not.
) What does the Constitution say about the right to bear arms? On the second amendment which guarantees to citizens the right to bear arms, if this bill did not exist , it would mean that people would not be able to keep firearms in their homes and be more safe in case of robbery or intrusion inside their properties and also make people feel more protected from people that want to harm their family or steal their belongings. 2) What is the Supreme Court's position on the Second amendment? The second amendment states: "a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed ". The meaning of this sentence is not self-evidence, and has given rise to much commentary but
Since the behaviour of the celebrities reflects on the brand, celebrity endorsers may at times become liabilities to the brands they endorse. The recent and the most popular one is the scandal caused by the
The media likes to capture rock musicians using drugs at wild parties and acting irresponsible to get attention from people and increase magazine sales and ratings. I consider musicians to be artists who use music as a form of expression. The majority of their actions are to uphold certain image expectations from their fan base. Rock stars are expected to act wild and crazy always engaging in scandals to keep their fans wanting more. While a majority of these people are addicts with psychological issues who usually die from overdoses of illicit drugs many actually have families and are regular normal people when they are not in the spotlight.
But what are their true motives? We are the citizens of this democratic nation, it is our duty to question the actions of our government, especially when those actions weaken our trust, defy the constitution, and fail to safeguard our information. Privacy is something that Americans safeguard. This is put to numbers in a survey taken by the Pew Research Center, which found that 93% of American adults believed that it was very important who received their information. Though we may safeguard our privacy, we may no
I think that the media do not respect celebrity’s private lives. As human beings, we all deserve some level of privacy. But when you're a celebrity, privacy holds another meaning. Most celebrities accept the fact that they will be followed by paparazzi the minute they step out their doors; after all, it does come with the territory. Celebrities spend a significant amount of time in front of the cameras, so it seems inevitable that some parts of their private lives will get out.
(Source D). Among these publications were People, Teen People, STAR, and National Enquirer. Television also fuels the invasion of privacy with shows that focus on celebrity gossip, such as Entertainment Tonight. While many of the daily events of a public figure’s life can seem interesting to the average Joe, it is merely for entertainment rather than for necessity in the average person’s life to know where the famous go on vacation, or go to dinner, or what they spend their money and time on.