"The federal government could use information found through Google to violate a person's privacy" in this way federal government can use of Google's ability to find lots of information and make it available to everyone be a privacy concern.
<u>Answer:</u> Option B
<u>Explanation:</u>
The illegal surveillance system in question in 2013, is named PRISM, within which the NSA, FBI, and CIA collect and scan international documents, phone calls, and chats from Americans without informing the police or legal system.
The government claims that it utilizes this system to identify foreigners, but this is only half the portrait, in actuality it employs PRISM as a back channel to the private data of Americans, violating massively the Fourth Amendment.
Answer:
Freedom of the Press
Explanation:
The US government had been lying to the American people about the Vietnam War - how many soldiers were killed, the strength of the opposing army, our involvemnet in the death of one of South Vietnam's leaders, and some other things.
Maybe the biggest lie was that our leaders, including President Lyndon Johnson, admitted we could probably not win in Vietnam unless we got so aggressive we might start an even bigger war, involving more countries, yet the President and other leaders kept telling the American people that victory could be had if we just kept sending troops.
Also, the US government wanted to get out of the war but were afraid of looking weak. So they kept sending soldiers to die in a war they did not expect to ever win, just to avoid saying they'd made a mistake.
All this information was contained in a report the government commissioned a civilain research company to do. They did the research at the US government's request but the government kept it secret. It was classified, and that meant it was a crime to tell the public about the report or what was in it.
A man named Daniel Ellsberg worked at the research company that did the report. He leaked the information to the press. The New York Times and the Washington Post published parts of the report, and the government threatened to lock them up for revealing government secrets.
The case went to the US Supreme Court. In 1971, in a 6-3 decision, the Court sided with the newspapers. The Court said it could not be allowed that the government could lie to the people and then hide the lie by locking up reporters for telling the truth. (Apparently, the other 3 Justices thought what the government was doing was okay. Conservative judges more frequently side with the government over the Bill of Rights.)
I remember all this because I was 14 years old when it happened, a long time ago. I was born in 1957.
The extension of slavery into the western territories.
For a specific instance, see the landmark supreme court case Dred Scott v. Sandford.
