In recent decades, technology has advanced rapidly in the non-public industry. Devices like the iPhone and the Internet have fundamentally changed the way we live, many of these changes being good and many being bad. As this technology makes our lives easier in many ways, it amplifies many threats and risks, as well as terrorism. These issues have been considered in several forums within the Supreme Court, and there are two prongs: privacy and national security. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay Make no mistake, these nationwide privacy and security issues are not black and white. The gray area is so vast, and that's why the line between privacy and protection on a national scale is so difficult to define. In 2015, a study by the Pew Research Center suggested that 54% of Americans disapprove of authorities collecting private data on cell phones and the Internet to protect you from terrorism. On the other hand, the top 42% approve, and the rest aren't sure. Additionally, 74% of Americans said they should not be forced to give up their privacy and freedom in the name of security, even though 22% said the opposite. This suggests that Americans generally choose privacy over domestic protection. However, I think one of the reasons non-public privacy is desired is because people are unsure whether authorities will protect their interests and what is best for them. In the United States Supreme Court, the outcomes between privacy and national security depend largely on the context in which they are found. Wiretapping is a prime example. For example, in 1928, in the case of Olmstead v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that wiretapping could be carried out with a warrant. However, in 1967, the Supreme Court ruled that you must have a warrant to wiretap phones in Katz v. UNITED STATES. “Judges had phones [in 1967], and they knew they were showing their most private matters on those phones.” Says Jennifer Granick, director of civil liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society. Granick went on to say that wiretapping cases differ based on their character dynamics. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay When it comes to the debate over private and national security, I suspect that national protection will generally be more crucial than privacy as long as authorities continue to protect the rights of their citizens. However, excessive measures of invasion of people's non-public privacy should not occur when this is not necessary. For example, I don't think the government should collect phone data from everyone, but even better from those suspected of a criminal offense or cooperation with a terrorist regime. Furthermore, I no longer assume that there is a fine line between what is permissible and what is not permissible to protect the security of the country and the personal right of individuals to privacy. This will generally be a gray area and people will constantly disagree with each other on what the right option is. Evaluations of myself and others further depend significantly on the context of specific situations. He.