Does the “Mass Collection of U.S. Phone Records Violates the Fourth Amendment”?

That was the question being debated on the most recent episode of the Intelligence Squared podcast.

Moderated by ABC News’ John Donvan, the debate featured Alex Abdo (American Civil Liberties Union) and Elizabeth Wydra (Constitutional Accountability Center) who argued for the motion; and Stewart Baker (Steptoe & Johnson) and John Yoo (University of California, Berkeley) who argued against the motion.

Here is description of the debate:

Some say that mass collection of U.S. phone records is a gross invasion of privacy. Others say that it is necessary to keep us safe. But what does the U.S Constitution say? “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Is collection of phone records a “search” or “seizure”? If so, is it “unreasonable”? Does it require a particularized warrant and probable cause? These are among the most consequential-and controversial-constitutional questions of our time.

The Ivory Tower Half Hour: PRISM, Federal Judges, and Economic Development

The Ivory Tower Half Hour: PRISM, Federal Judges, and Economic Development

Hosted by Barbara Fought, Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University, this powerhouse panel of Lisa Dolak (Syracuse University College of Law), Tim Byrnes (Colgate University), Bob Greene (Cazenovia College), Tara Ross (Onondaga County Community College), and  Kristi Andersen (Syracuse University) discuss the recent revelation of the PRISM program, the selection of federal judges, and boosing economic development.