Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
4 bytes added ,  04:36, July 3, 2025
no edit summary
Line 1: Line 1: −
'''Wiretapping''' is the act of intercepting [[telephone]] or other communications by a third party.  In many cases, neither party to the communication is aware that a third party is monitoring it.  In 1967 the United States Supreme Court held that wiretapping (or “intercepting communications”) requires a [[warrant]] in ''[[Katz v. United States]]''.<ref>{{cite web|title=FACTS AND CASE SUMMARY: KATZ V. UNITED STATES|url=http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/fourth-amendment/wiretaps-cell-phone-surveillance/facts-case-summary.aspx}}</ref>  In 1968, Congress enacted a procedure for granting wiretap warrants for criminal investigations.<ref>{{cite web|title=Federal Statutes: Relevant in the Information Sharing Environment (ISE)|url=https://it.ojp.gov/default.aspx?area=privacy&page=1284|publisher=DHS/Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the DHS/Privacy Office in cooperation with the DOJ, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance}}</ref>  In 1978, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ([[FISA]]) created a special secret [[court]] for issuing wiretap warrants in national security cases.<ref>{{cite web|title=Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court|url=http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/courts_special_fisc.html|website=Federal Judicial Center}}</ref> The [[Patriot Act]] of 2001 expanded the use of "wiretaps" beyond foreign intelligence agencies to individuals and non-governmental bodies such as weapons smugglers, terrorist organizations and drug cartels.
+
'''Wiretapping''' is the act of intercepting [[telephone]] or other communications by a third party.  In many cases, neither party to the communication is aware that a third party is monitoring it.  In 1967 the United States Supreme Court held that wiretapping (or “intercepting communications”) requires a [[warrant]] in ''[[Katz v. United States]]''.<ref>{{cite web|title=FACTS AND CASE SUMMARY: KATZ V. UNITED STATES|url=http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/fourth-amendment/wiretaps-cell-phone-surveillance/facts-case-summary.aspx}}</ref>  In 1968, Congress enacted a procedure for granting wiretap warrants for criminal investigations.<ref>{{cite web|title=Federal Statutes: Relevant in the [[Information Sharing]] Environment (ISE)|url=https://it.ojp.gov/default.aspx?area=privacy&page=1284|publisher=DHS/Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the DHS/Privacy Office in cooperation with the DOJ, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance}}</ref>  In 1978, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ([[FISA]]) created a special secret [[court]] for issuing wiretap warrants in national security cases.<ref>{{cite web|title=Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court|url=http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/courts_special_fisc.html|website=Federal Judicial Center}}</ref> The [[Patriot Act]] of 2001 expanded the use of "wiretaps" beyond foreign intelligence agencies to individuals and non-governmental bodies such as weapons smugglers, terrorist organizations and drug cartels.
    
The term "wiretap" originally referred to physically splicing hard wires, yet remains a legal term redefined for electronic surveillance of texting, voice, and email through search engine capabilities.
 
The term "wiretap" originally referred to physically splicing hard wires, yet remains a legal term redefined for electronic surveillance of texting, voice, and email through search engine capabilities.
Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,570

edits

Navigation menu