Should Government Should Play A Role In Monitoring Internet Content?

"The question of whether government of any size should play a role in monitoring internet content is very complex. Does the welfare of society warrant a breach of individual privacy? Should the government be in charge of monitoring internet content to ensure citizens are protected? These are not simple questions, and not answerable with a simple yes or no.

Ronald Reagan stated, “Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.” When it comes to the role government should play in monitoring the internet, the government has the duty to protect its citizens, but anything overreaching this, is not the duty of the government. The Supreme Court has held there are limitations to the freedom of speech, such as ""advocacy of the use of force"" is unprotected when it is ""directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action"" and is ""likely to incite or produce such action."" These same limitations transfer over when relating to internet content as well. In the name of national security and immediate danger, the government has reason to further investigate, and after thorough examination with the consent of elected officials, has the right to take further action.
It is responsible for safeguarding against threats and and attacks on these rights. However, they do not have the duty to regulate what should and should not be on the internet. The Due Process clauses in the Fifth Amendment and Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution say: “No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” and: “[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” These clauses do not allow for government regulation of the internet, as that would deprive a person of their