The U.S. Supreme Court and the legitimization of surveillance

The book analyzes the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings in cases concerning surveillance, both domestic and foreign intelligence, focusing on how judicial activism or judicial restraint has legitimized the almost uncontrolled surveillance of American citizens by government agencies. The purpose of the research is to examine the judiciary’s impact on the scope of government surveillance and, more broadly, on the state of American democracy and the rule of law. By reviewing the most important SCOTUS opinions on surveillance and applying the famous “legitimate end” approach from McCulloch v. Maryland, the author determines which values have prevailed in the judicial interpretation of the Constitution: security or freedom. Furthermore, the book evaluates the legal and political arguments used by the Court to justify broad surveillance measures, including the national security paradigm and secrecy, which have strengthened the executive branch’s position in the U.S. governmental system.