Carte Blanche: The Expanding Reach of the Surveillance State

Siarhei Horbach

While things in life are subject to interpretation, the overreach of the federal government is so blatant that it cannot be interpreted as anything other than what it is. This pattern of behavior has been consistent for some time, affecting both the Democratic and Republican parties, with neither able to claim sole ownership, nor is either more guilty than the other. They are both coconspirators in the drive to monitor Americans night and day with little to no reason other than their desire to do so. Regardless of the administration, the lives of American citizens have been systemically invaded by the government, irrespective of the promises or assurances of Presidents and party leaders alike. The issue is bipartisan mainly in the sense that both parties continue to work together to ensure that the government has the authority to spy on US citizens, regardless of their location.  Reauthorizing  FISA, pushing for facial recognition and other monitoring technology in airports and public spaces, and the push for centralized IDs, are all methods the government is continuously trying to use in order to monitor Americans without any legal permission or cause. 

On April 12th, 2024, the US House of Representatives voted 273 to 147 to reauthorize section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted in favor of the reauthorization. An amendment was proposed that would have required a warrant for its use, but it failed in a party-line vote of 212 to 212. The Biden Administration had long sought its passage, arguing that it would be a tool to fight terrorism, despite little evidence to support this claim. The Trump Administration and the Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House haven't brought up any legislation since taking office to remove the authorization. It is one of a growing list of items that each new administration likes to have at its discretion, regardless of its political affiliation. The Biden Administration, with bipartisan support, was about to secure the reauthorization with a vote of 60 to 34 in the Senate. While the administration had been critical of their perceived abuses by the first Trump Administration, Republicans in both houses had been critical of the Biden Administration for doing the same. They overwhelmingly agreed that FISA must continue to exist for fear that its lapse would lead to some unforeseen terrorist attack that they could deter in the 11th hour.

The great fear of terrorism doesn't stop with the government monitoring all forms of communication; it has also begun implementing facial recognition software in airports. The reasoning is two-fold. First, and most appealing, it allows for easy access through TSA and security checkpoints by simply sliding your ID through a scanner and then staring into a camera that matches your eyes, and possibly other biometrics one day, verifying your identity and allowing you to move on your way to your flight seamlessly. This enables the government to store and use your facial recognition to track your movements anywhere they have cameras pointed. Secondly, it allows the government to track non-citizens, which Congress has authorized CBP to do by collecting their biometrics. The great danger is that once the processes are in place and government agencies have developed the capabilities to store and sort that data, it would only take the push of a button to activate it against U.S. citizens. It would not be the first time a government program was used on Americans or that a government agency acted without the consent of Congress to monitor and abuse them. The mid-20th century is marked by numerous examples, including the Tuskegee Experiments, MKULTRA, and COINTELPRO. All three were examples of experimenting and spying on Americans without informing Congress or seeking approval beforehand. Once Pandora's box is opened, it cannot be closed. Not unless Congress acts by using both federal law and the Inspectors General to ensure that these abuses do not occur. This is a difficult ask for the legislature that continues to authorize FISA with a majority of support. 

Digital IDs take it a step further; recording all of your biometric data and then requiring it as proof for every purchase, money transfer, or withdrawal, and to board any plane, train, or boat, the government will know exactly where you are and what you are doing. It could also effectively install a kill switch into any purchases or activities the government deems unlawful. This is packaged as a safe and contained way to do business transactions and daily activities. While the Biden administration had made it a priority for government agents to begin implementing them, the Trump Administration has neither removed these mandates nor encouraged their broader use in the government. However, in an effort to make the US more attractive to the crypto business community, it has partnered with the industry to push for digital IDs as a way of making transactions more secure. This means they are encouraging its adoption through the private sector with regulatory mandates and using the lure of cryptocurrency and wealth creation as a method of making it fashionable and profitable. Thus masking the fear of government overreach with good old-fashioned capitalism—a poison pill by any other name.

It is not a conspiracy theory to believe that the government regularly and relentlessly uses the power that it granted itself to spy on Americans. What adds insult to injury is the fact that the guise of safety and convenience is the tool often used to hide these regular abuses of our rights. There is no inevitability to the coming waves of surveillance through real IDs and facial recognition as long as there is regular resistance to these measures and due diligence to the situations as they develop. There will be no terrible event or attack that can be avoided because of these measures, which will justify the erosion of rights and privacy that they bring. The 3rd Amendment to the Constitution reads, "No Soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." The founders had to deal with the burden of supporting the British Crown both through taxes and the added burden of providing for the soldiers who would so often abuse their homes and hearths. It may be time to update the amendment to take into account how those harsh realities may soon be rearing their ugly head in modern times, as the government is on the path of doing so, and for the same reason. For the safety of its citizens and to prevent unlawful behavior.