Final answer:
Arguments against warrantless wiretapping include the violation of privacy rights and concerns about government overreach. Privacy is protected by the Fourth Amendment and requires judicial oversight for data access. Government overreach through laws like the Patriot Act risks undermining civil liberties and balancing security with freedom.
Step-by-step explanation:
Two arguments against warrantless wiretapping include privacy concerns and the potential for government overreach. Privacy is a fundamental right protected under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which requires the government to show probable cause and obtain a warrant before accessing an individual’s personal data. The argument against warrantless wiretapping is that it violates this right to privacy, as it allows the government to access personal information without judicial oversight, potentially leading to abuses of power and infringement on individual freedoms. In addition to privacy concerns, there is the argument of government overreach. Laws such as the USA PATRIOT Act have been critiqued for granting too much power to the federal government, often being used to pursue ordinary criminal cases rather than focusing on terrorism as intended. Such expansive surveillance powers have the potential to undermine civil liberties, heighten concerns about governmental authority, and raise questions about the balance between security and freedom. European countries often enact stricter protections against government surveillance, recognizing the risks to personal freedoms, and recent court rulings, such as Carpenter v. United States, affirm the need for search warrants in collecting certain digital information.