As Americans it is of the utmost importance that we have an understanding of our own rights and freedoms granted to us by the Constitution and its amendments.  The Fourth Amendment in particular is one that should be noted as it provides American citizens with the right of privacy from the government as it limits the Federal Government from searching or seizing a person or his possessions without a proper warrant (The Fourth Amendment).  Today there are many different interpretations and informal amendments to the Forth Amendment of the Constitution.  This is only natural with the progression of time and as new circumstances call for government officials to view the Fourth Amendment through a different lens (The Fourth Amendment).

            The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution declares that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Search and Seizure).  The Founding Fathers turned to British History for their inspiration for this and many other Constitutional amendments.  They admired the idea presented by Sir Edward Coke during the Semayne Case where he said “The house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence as for his repose.” (Wikipedia). The Semayne Case ruled that the King did not have authority to barge into his subjects home and that the government (Parliament) had the authority but only when a warrant had been obtained (Wikipedia).

            Today however, it is hard for life to be “private”. Author Bruce Schneier has this to say about the issue; “In the United States, the concept of "expectation of privacy" matters because it's the constitutional test, based on the Fourth Amendment, that governs when and how the government can invade your privacy.

Based on the 1967 Katz v. United States Supreme Court decision, this test actually has two parts. First, the government's action can't contravene an individual's subjective expectation of privacy; and second, that expectation of privacy must be one that society in general recognizes as reasonable. That second part isn't based on anything like polling data; it is more of a normative idea of what level of privacy people should be allowed to expect, given the competing importance of personal privacy on one hand and the government's interest in public safety on the other.

The problem is, in today's information society, that definition test will rapidly leave us with no privacy at all.”(Schneier).  Mr. Schneier brings up a very valid point when considering just how information driven our society is, not to mention how incredibly well connected the world is.  Privacy in the modern world is almost non-existent thanks to the internet, cell phones, security cameras and credit cards.  One would have to literally become a hermit living far from society in order to avoid the possibility of being tracked (The Fourth Amendment).  With the recent installment of the Homeland Security Act, the government now has the right and authority to eavesdrop on my father’s phone calls simply because he is an immigrant from the Middle-East.

As Americans it is of the utmost importance that we have an understanding of our own rights and freedoms granted to us by the Constitution and its amendments.  The Fourth Amendment in particular is one that should be noted as it provides American citizens with the right of privacy from the government as it limits the Federal Government from searching or seizing a person or his possessions without a proper warrant (The Fourth Amendment).  Today there are many different interpretations and informal amendments to the Forth Amendment of the Constitution.  This is only natural with the progression of time and as new circumstances call for government officials to view the Fourth Amendment through a different lens (The Fourth Amendment).

            The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution declares that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Search and Seizure).  The Founding Fathers turned to British History for their inspiration for this and many other Constitutional amendments.  They admired the idea presented by Sir Edward Coke during the Semayne Case where he said “The house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence as for his repose.” (Wikipedia). The Semayne Case ruled that the King did not have authority to barge into his subjects home and that the government (Parliament) had the authority but only when a warrant had been obtained (Wikipedia).

            Today however, it is hard for life to be “private”. Author Bruce Schneier has this to say about the issue; “In the United States, the concept of "expectation of privacy" matters because it's the constitutional test, based on the Fourth Amendment, that governs when and how the government can invade your privacy.

Based on the 1967 Katz v. United States Supreme Court decision, this test actually has two parts. First, the government's action can't contravene an individual's subjective expectation of privacy; and second, that expectation of privacy must be one that society in general recognizes as reasonable. That second part isn't based on anything like polling data; it is more of a normative idea of what level of privacy people should be allowed to expect, given the competing importance of personal privacy on one hand and the government's interest in public safety on the other.

The problem is, in today's information society, that definition test will rapidly leave us with no privacy at all.”(Schneier).  Mr. Schneier brings up a very valid point when considering just how information driven our society is, not to mention how incredibly well connected the world is.  Privacy in the modern world is almost non-existent thanks to the internet, cell phones, security cameras and credit cards.  One would have to literally become a hermit living far from society in order to avoid the possibility of being tracked (The Fourth Amendment).  With the recent installment of the Homeland Security Act, the government now has the right and authority to eavesdrop on my father’s phone calls simply because he is an immigrant from the Middle-East.