Edward Snowden is a name that most people have probably heard since he exposed the massive surveillance program at the National Security Agency in 2013. Dubbed a “whistleblower,” Snowden revealed that the agency was collecting massive amounts of telephone metadata, while also monitoring most other forms of communication. When first brought up, the Supreme Court ruled that the program was not subject to judicial review. Snowden was declared a traitor and fled to seek asylum in Russia and other countries.
Edward Snowden in the interview where he exposed the NSA surveillance program
Recently, however, the Supreme Court has revisited the case and determined that the spying done by the NSA was, in fact, illegal. This is a monumental step forward in bringing formal charges against the NSA for what many believe was an unlawful, ridiculous invasion of privacy. The debate has been raging since 2013, when Snowden first informed the public about the data collection. Government sources have cited the need for national security as the reason for the collection, while many private citizens have declared the invasion of privacy as worse than any national security issues that could have arose.
NSA Headquarters
Moving forward, it is uncertain what will ultimately result from this debate. The reauthorization of a key Patriot Act provision is currently gridlocked in Congress, and it is unlikely that its situation will change any time soon. In regards to the data collection by the NSA, the judges stated, “We conclude that to allow the government to collect phone records only because they may become relevant to a possible authorized investigation in the future fails even the permissive ‘relevance’ test.” This case could lead to a new definition of what is an acceptable level of governmental involvement in people’s lives.