Liberty for Security

Michael Freimuth
UW

It was 1787 and delegates from the 13 states had met in Philadelphia to determine what form the new government would take. The strict secrecy in which the meeting was conducted led anxious citizens to gather outside freedom hall in anticipation of the final agreement. Upon his emergence, Benjamin Franklin was approached by a local woman named Mrs. Powell who asked, "Well Doctor, what have we
got?"
To which Franklin replied: "A republic, if you can keep it."
Two years later, the First United States Congress added the Bill of Rights. The first ten amendments to the constitution were part of the Massachusetts compromise which occurred after a long debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. The Anti-Federalists were concerned that the central government they were creating would be too powerful and the bill of rights was a way of explicitly limiting its power and preserving those "essential liberties", without which, we would be in danger of descending back into tyranny. To put it another way, it was to help us preserve our republic.
It is imperative that we rediscover the importance of our constitutional rights because they are under assault and we don’t even seem to notice. To see what I mean read the fourth amendment:
"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."
Then go to the airport where you will see people being "randomly" (which means arbitrarily) selected and put through a rigorous and intrusive search with no warrant or probable cause merely because they wanted to get on a plane. But this is not an intrusion according to Attorney General Janet Napolitano.
Her response to people who don’t want to go through the searches: "Don’t fly."
According to Napolitano, "If people want to travel by some other means, they have that right."
But consider for a moment what this means. Unlike driving on public roads, which has long been held to be "a privilege not a right," getting on an airplane is a purely private exchange between two private parties. If the government can interject themselves between you and an airline and force you to submit to intrusive searches before you are allowed to conduct a private business transaction, then do you really have the right to travel by other means or do you just have the ability to do so at the moment because the government hasn’t decided to take it away yet? The answer is obvious, but in case you’re not convinced, here is what Napolitano had to say about it on "Charlie Rose":
"I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?"
If the government came out and said that from now on, the police have the right to "randomly" stop cars and search them or stop people walking down the street and search them wouldn’t we be outraged? So why aren’t we outraged when they stop us in line at the airport? Clearly it is because terrorists are scary and remember that we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared. But are terrorists confined to attacks on airplanes? Couldn’t a terrorist put a bomb in his car and park it in Time’s Square? Couldn’t they strap one to their chest and walk down the street?
Maybe you think that the government will just stop at the airport, and you might be right but if they don’t stop there what will stop them? Where is the line that they cannot cross? That which was designed to stop them is the Constitution and it drew the line at unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause. But now they are blatantly violating this protection and we are just shrugging and saying, "whatever it takes to keep us safe." But we need to understand that this is not just about trading a little privacy for safety, it’s about trading liberty for safety. And remember:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-Ben Franklin