In New York, the Handschu rules place limits on surveillance. In the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, a judge loosened the law, technically allowing police to infiltrate any group. The namesake of the Handschu rules says it shouldn't be that way and wants her name removed from the law. A judge denied her request. She's concerned the rules are being used to justify the widespread surveillance of Muslim Americans. They also don't approve of the use of surveillance on protesters, as has been occuring during the Occupy Wallstreet movement. The theory is, when people think they're being watched, they'll be scared to dissent.
Where do we draw the line between protecting our safety, and protecting our rights to free speech and assembly?
No comments:
Post a Comment