FISA And Privacy Analysis

FISA epitomizes the relationship between security and privacy, which has never been more prevalent than it is in this moment. FISA is the metaphor for the relationship between the American government and its people today. Citizens expect their government to protect them from foreign and domestic threats without willingly giving up much of their privacy. FISA has illustrated the government's ability to manipulate the law in order to ensure the continuity of their power. The era post 9/11 has propelled America into a new era where electronic surveillance has moved from individual to mass surveillance. FISA has proven to be immensely effective in respect to the federal government. It is speculated that the FISC has never once denied a warrant. The accompanying House Report to FISA explained the executive's ability to obtain a warrant was described as the “mosaic theory and went on to state:
“It is often contended that a counterintelligence officer or intelligence analyst, if not the policymaker himself, must have every possible bit of information about a subject because it might provide an important piece of the larger picture. In that
sense, any information relating to the specified purposes might be called ‘necessary’ but such a reading is clearly not intended.” (Goitein, 88)

What socio legal theories?
FISA establishes the paragon for the law on the books versus the law in action.
If one were to read FISA word for word and accept all the words for their strict definitions, it would not appear to be so outstanding. It is once one realizes the application and implications of FISA that it demonstrates the government's true power and authority. This is why sociological jurisprudence is applicable because FISA’s realm is best demonstrated through its application. However, I believe the divide between the law in the books versus the law in action has widened too far regarding FISA. I believe major reforms would be necessary to bring FISA into compliance with our Constitution. This would be no easy-undertaking though. Just the mere skim of the surface causes significant challenges as outlined in The Brennan Centers Article which
states:
“While allowing the executive branch to approve its own surveillance procedures might cure any Article III defects, however, it would exacerbate Fourth Amendment concerns. The recommendations for reform that appear below would not resolve every concern surrounding the activities of the FISA Court, but would go far toward bolstering the constitutionality, under both Article III and the Fourth Amendment, of the FISA scheme.” (Goitein, 51)
Primarily, how could an entity convince the federal government to relinquish power that it has already received and utilized. Perhaps more importantly, what would it do to our national security? These are important aspects that must be strongly evaluated when weighing the harm or benefits FISA provides to the American people.