• Constitutional Speech (Personal and Corporate) * (personal); afforded highest protection by the Courts. Balance must be struck between a government’s obligation to protect its citizens versus a citizen’s right to speech. In other words, if government suppresses speech it must be to protect the citizens. EX. Don’t yell fire in a crowded area. See below. * If restriction is content neutral, restrictions must target some societal problem – not to primarily suppress the message. (Corporate); -Political speech by corporations is protected by the First Amendment. -In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) the Supreme Court ruled that corporations can spend freely to support or oppose candidates for …show more content…
So if evidence obtained in violation of due process is brought, then any evidence that comes from the initial evidence is not admissible either. * • Cyber Crimes: Any act directed against computers or that uses computers as an instrumentality of a crime. * -Cyber Fraud: fraud committed over the internet (e.g., Nigerian letter scam). * Online Auction Fraud. Cyber Theft: -Identity Theft. -Phishing. -vishing. -Employment Fraud. -Credit-Card Crime on the Web * Prosecution of Cyber Crime. * “Location” of crime is an issue. * Jurisdiction of courts is an issue. * Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. * Person is liable if he accesses a computer online, without authority, to obtain classified, private, or protected information. * • Criminal Penalties; To be convicted of a crime, a person must: -Commit a guilty act (actus reus). -Have the guilty mind (mens rea) during commission of the guilty act. * State of Mind. -Required intent (or mental state) is indicated in the applicable statute or law. -Criminal Negligence or Recklessness (unjustified, substantial and foreseeable risk that results in harm). -Violent Crime. * Murder, sexual assault, rape, robbery. -Property Crime. * Burglary, larceny, theft of trade secrets, theft of services, arson, receipt of stolen goods, forgery. • Criminal
America’s first president George Washington once argued at the [whenever he said this] that “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” It is an essential component to the daily life of any constitutional republic, such as that of the United States even though it is a right granted to all American citizens, in the past, freedom of speech has been abridged to accommodate political correctness, to prevent disruptive behavior that could negatively affect others, and to protect confidential military information.
The issue of campaign financing was argued again more recently in the Supreme Court case, Citizens United v FEC. In this case the Citizens United conservative non-profit argued that an ad for the movie Fahrenheit 9/11 was critical of George Bush and therefore the commercial was a campaigning ad funded by an outside group within sixty days of the general election. Citizens United argued the ad was illegal according to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) passed in 2002 that stated no electioneering committee could fund an ad 60 days before an election. Citizens United believed Fahrenheit 9/11 was critical of Bush’s response to 9/11 and therefore was an ad for the opposing candidate Al Gore. The Supreme Court decided that if a company wants to use their money to campaign, since money is an expression of speech, there cannot be any law limiting when you can express your views politically. The court determined that the portions of FECA and BCRA related to restrictions on corporate and labor union spending was unconstitutional as it prohibited free speech. Citizens United reaffirmed the president set by Buckley vs. Valeo that money is
4. Evidence illegally obtained by the police in violation of the Fourth Amendment will be excluded from trial whether or not the police acted in good faith?
In this Supreme Court 5-4 decision, the Court states that the First Amendment protects corporate and union funding of independent political broadcasts in elections. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech.” Or as the Court says, the
“All contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any political purpose should be forbidden by law” This quote from Theodore Roosevelt illustrates how corporate money can be disastrous when involved in election cycles. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The Supreme Court decided in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that companies and Super PAC’s could donate unlimited amount of money to support candidates. The Citizens United ruling has caused increased political corruption in the United States by giving candidates the money they need to win an election while changing policies that would be beneficial to the company.
On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Citizens United v Federal Election Commission allowed for corporations and capitalist enterprises to be treated as individuals during an election period. This ruling allows corporations to spend or give an unlimited amount of money in contributions to their party or candidate of choice in any given election. With the loss of corporate financial regulations, our entire political system runs the risk of being corrupted by corporations whose sole objective is to satisfy its share-holders. This ruling affects all Americans their "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness." President Barack Obama had this to say about the ruling:
Explain the theme of the book (summary/overview) in your own words, and why this is important to our understanding of the information technology.
One main issue raised by presidential hopefuls revolves around campaign money received by candidates, donated by multi-million dollar corporations. Although it remains illegal for these corporations to directly donate large sums of money to political campaigns and political parties, the fear that political and judicial figures in the American political systems are being bought out by these affluent corporations still worries an inordinate amount of people in the United States. In 2009, the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. FEC whether these wealthy companies had the constitutional right to air advertisements they paid for using company expenditures. Similar to Supreme Court cases within the past half-century, the case suggests that
No one knows how much of that money came from corporate treasures. The courts five to four decision said that is it OK for corporations and labor unions to spend as much as they want to convince people to vote for or against a candidate. The courts decision also stated that the first amendment prohibits government from placing limits on independent spending for political purposes by corporations and unions.
The case “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission” was to regulate the spendings of candidates campaign, but it failed to succeed. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. (Bentley, 2017) The case was ruled in favor of big business donating private funds to campaigns. They argued because the first amendment protects the right to speak of many corporations and unions, whether or not people see them as human, therefore the are aloud to donate money to a candidate. (Bentley, 2017) In the academic journal written by Bentley, he States the Court majority (Justices Kennedy, Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas) argued, " although government has the authority to prevent corruption or “the appearance of corruption,” it has no place in determining whether large political expenditures are either of those things, so it may not impose spending limits on that basis." This meaning the government cannot enforce spending limits on private donors due to the government not being able to identify the big businesses as "corrupted". Since the government cannot label an organization as corrupt or unjust, therefore the donor can continue to assist the candidate. The main problem is the United States of America seems to avoid this. There is a clear problem with Citizens United being able to continue donating money to candidates without giving them so much power. This can be stopped through a constitutional amendment to strip away the corporations of their rights. (Bentley, 2017) By doing this, there will be a very successful campaign for future candidates due to there being an equal amount of money being distributed to them
The internet has brought upon a new revolution of global interconnection where contacting someone on the other side of the world is just a click away, but with this international phenomenon comes an increased susceptibility with unfamiliar technology. Internet crime is compiled of all non-physical crime with the aid of a computer. Although broad in definition internet crimes are largely composed of acts such as cyber fraud, ‘phishing’ (username and password hacking), cyber stalking and hacking. Internet crime does not pose an overwhelming issue in society in terms of its
Cyber Crime is described as criminal activity committed via use of electronic communications with respect to cyber fraud or identity theft through phishing and spoofing. There are many other forms of cyber-crime also such as harassment, pornography etc. via use of information technology.
Since 2010 there have been over 13 major cyber attacks in the US, the FBI categorizes the severity of the attack based on what could possibly be at stake such as information on US citizens or hijacking of critical information . Cyber attacks are classified as crimes committed with the aid of a computer. Cyber crimes are considered felonies, however most people who commit the crimes can usually not be found. Recently there has been an uprising in cyber crimes, in the year 2017 alone 9 minor incidents have occured (minor attacks can consist of malware and internet “trolling” which is a form of cyberbullying) and 4 major crimes have been committed. Most crimes consist of identity theft, robbery, and hijacking private information. Recently programmers have been able to build security systems that can detect a threat almost immediately. With a growing expansion of technology protecting information gets harder day by day. Cyber security is the body of technologies, processes and practices designed to protect networks, computers, programs and data from attack, damage or unauthorized access.
In fact, computers are not only the means of the crime, but also the target of it. Cyber crime encompasses a wide range of activities, including: hacking, phishing, denial of service (DoS) attacks, creating and distributing malware, unauthorized data access, corruption of deletion of data, interception of data (Kennedys).
Cybercrime we have when a computer is the object of the crime like hacking, phishing, spamming or is used as a tool to commit an offense like the child pornography, hate crimes etc.