In Tapping Our Common Sense, Michael Rosen looks at the recent wiretapping scandal:
Based on various reports, though, it seems fair to assume that the National Security Agency engaged in some combination of data mining of communications data (phone numbers, email addresses, etc.) and electronic recording of communicative content (phone calls, emails, etc.). The NSA then likely aggregated and sifted this information — probably through pattern recognition computer software — and more carefully scrutinized the resulting nuggets. This “funnel approach” provides the only convincing explanation for why the Administration did not, for the most part, apply retroactively for warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, since probable cause for the wiretaps became apparent only after the wide net has been cast and the useless information discarded.And this approach — combining automated retrieval of data (which is not generally protected by the Fourth Amendment) and content (which is safeguarded by the Constitution) with human evaluation of the winnowed information — provides critical food for thought for a technological society confronted with balancing our basic freedoms against a foreign assault against them.
An important point:
It’s helpful, first, to unravel the two intertwined threads running through this debate: whether a hypothetical president should enjoy these powers and whether the current administration should.