The particulars of such actions were in effect up until the early 1970s and it was the ‘Keith’ case that predominantly broke the shackles to such unfair means. In 1972 the Keith case was one of the major turnarounds that led to the development of FISA courts in the country. Technically speaking this particular legal case was between the United States’ government and a United States district court. The district court emphasized that an acting attorney general gave specific directive permission to carry out electronic wireless intelligence without a warrant on a US citizen accused of bombing a Central Intelligence Agency building. The Supreme Court firmly rejected the US government’s petition of claiming foreign intelligence on the per se warrant requirement but the court emphasized that according to the legislative structure and constituting to the fourth amendment it is uniquely prohibited to use of warrantless surveillance particularly directed at domestic threats to U.S. national security. The court however did not reach a general consensus on whether it is appropriate to target warrantless surveillance on foreign individuals and agents pertaining to other agencies but opened up a new line of thought for the executive council suggesting that it may be up to the latter body if and how they would significantly indulge in matters related to the mentioned entities and personnel. The Supreme Court however demanded that the congress issue a revised plan for a fool proof constitutional amendment that would ensure as a constitutional element for future electronic wireless surveillance of threats regarding the national security of the United States. Another event...
The paper tells that there are several fundamental aspects of the FISA warrants and it solely addresses to two particular fractions of people that may pose a potential threat to the national security of the United States. Firstly warrants are foremost issued to personnel that are categorized as a foreign power. Places or entities that succumb to such definitions may potentially include a foreign government, a diplomat; other representative or employee of a foreign government, a fraction of a foreign nation that is not substantially composed of US persons, an entity openly acknowledged by a foreign government to be directed and controlled by it, or a group engaged in international terrorism or activities in preparation therefore. The second defining figure that a FISA warrant can be issued to, are agents of foreign powers. These may fundamentally include any individual who is not a US person and works for a foreign power inside the united states or an individual who again may not be a US person but engaged in espionage intelligence gathering activities running from within any associated foreign power. However the FISA constitution does also recognize US citizen as also potential National security threats and a FISA warrant can be issued if for some reason they may be suspected with substantial defying evidence of engaging into espionage pertaining to compromising the national security of the United States or involved in clandestine intelligence gathering activities for a foreign power which activities constitute a violation of U.S. criminal statutes.
Cite this document
(“Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (F.I.S.A.) court Term Paper”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/law/3079-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-fisa-court
(Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (F.I.S.A.) Court Term Paper)
“Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (F.I.S.A.) Court Term Paper”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/law/3079-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-fisa-court.
Cited: 0 times
The paper would submit the author’s own perspective of how things affecting national security should be categorized by law and are FISA laws of current stature morally and internationally acceptable as the legal procedure to enact US defense…
This culminated into extensive research on the creation of intelligent machines. Harris (2010) indicates that the research process has resulted in the creation of smart machines and computers that enhance the creation of artificial intelligence techniques.
The terrorist attacks on the US on September 11, 2001 and the US role in the invasion of Iraq in 2003 gave rise to a number of official inquiries that subsequently revealed significant intelligence failure. As a result, significant changes were introduced impacting the structure and operation of the US intelligence community.
The name of the chief justice who is the leader of the court at that time is used for the reference. Warren Court is considered to be most distinctive Supreme Court of all times. Some of the decisions made by this court are still used today. THE WARREN COURT: Chief justice Earl Warren was a considered to be a conservative who would and a lot of people thought that he would hold up conservative principles and objectives.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is the uppermost appellate court in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, hearing the limited number of appeals. This report is a culmination of a visit to the court on 1st April 2013, and it captures the workings of the courts and an analysis on its strength and weaknesses.
Cognitive dissonance theory was first published by Leon Festinger in 1957. The theory has since generated a series of theoretical deliberations and research. Initially, Festinger in his theory defined cognitive dissonance as a psychological or motivational state that causes an individual to try to eliminate or reduce it.
In this regard, there has been the need to replace the problem oriented approach with emotional intelligence and appreciative inquiry as a means of achieving improved outcomes. This paper offers a brief description of an issue in a health care setting that requires change,
2 pages (500 words)Term Paper
Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you!Try us!
Let us find you another Term Paper on topic Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (F.I.S.A.) court for FREE!