Skip to main content

Don't let drones invade our privacy

By Rand Paul, Special to CNN
June 15, 2012 -- Updated 1316 GMT (2116 HKT)
U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, fears domestic use of drones would violate our Fourth Amendment rights.
U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, fears domestic use of drones would violate our Fourth Amendment rights.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Sen. Rand Paul says surveillance drones in the U.S. could track everyday activity
  • He says it's a violation of the Constitution to spy with drones without approval by a judge
  • Rand Paul says police should be able to get approval for limited use of drones
  • He says legislation is need to reaffirm the rules set out in the Constitution

Editor's note: Rand Paul, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Kentucky.

(CNN) -- When assuming office, every government official must take an oath to abide by and uphold our Constitution. Since 2010, I have made that my mission in Congress. Unfortunately, the Obama administration is not upholding nor abiding by the Constitution -- in fact, this administration is going to great lengths to continually violate it.

Its most recent transgression involves the use of domestic drones.

These small drones are to be used as a crime fighting tool for law enforcement officials. But is unwarranted and constant surveillance by an aerial eye of Big Government the answer?

Sen. Rand Paul
Sen. Rand Paul

In a memorandum issued by President Barack Obama's secretary of the Air Force, the stated purpose of these drones is "balancing ... obtaining intelligence information ... and protecting individual rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution."

However, flying over our homes, farms, ranches and businesses and spying on us while we conduct our everyday lives is not an example of protecting our rights. It is an example of violating them.

The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy. I do not want a drone hovering over my house, taking photos of whether I separate my recyclables from my garbage.

Poll: Don't use drones for speeding tickets

Sen. Paul says no to domestic drones
Officials open up about drones
Markey: Public debate needed on drones

When I have friends over for a barbecue, the government drone is not on the invitation list. I do not want a drone monitoring where I go, what I do and for how long I do whatever it is that I'm doing. I do not want a nanny state watching over my every move.

We should not be treated like criminals or terrorists while we are simply conducting our everyday lives. We should not have our rights infringed upon by unwarranted police-state tactics.

I have introduced legislation into the Senate that restates the Constitution.

This bill protects individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of these drones. The Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2012 will protect Americans' personal privacy by forcing the government to honor our Fourth Amendment rights.

I want to make it clear that I am not arguing against the use of technology. But like other tools used to collect information in law enforcement, a warrant needs to be issued to use drones domestically. The police force should have the power to collect intelligence; however, I believe they must go through a judge and request a warrant to do so. The judicial branch must have some authority over drones, as they do with other law enforcement tools.

My bill will restate the Fourth Amendment and protect American's privacy by forcing police officials to obtain a warrant before using domestic drones.

There are some exceptions within this bill, such as the patrol of our national borders, when immediate action is needed to prevent "imminent danger to life," and when we are under a high risk of a terrorist attack. Otherwise, the government must have probable cause that led them to ask for a warrant before the use of drones is permitted.

If the warrant is not obtained, this act would allow any person to sue the government. This act also specifies that no evidence obtained or collected in violation of this act can be admissible as evidence in a criminal, civil or regulatory action.

Allowing domestic drones to act as spies for the government is a complete violation of our basic right to personal privacy.

Unrestricted drone surveillance conjures up images reminiscent of Orwell's "1984" -- a totalitarian police-state. According to 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."

I am sure our police force had good intentions with their suggested drone policies, but do they understand the consequences? Do they realize that they are allowing the government to act as the eye in the sky?

By infringing upon our rights and watching over our every move, the government is not going to protect us, but they will push us one more step closer to completely losing our Fourth Amendment rights. My bill will protect individual privacy against governmental intrusion by these drones and establish a balance by requiring judicial action and allowing protection in court.

I am confident that my colleagues in the Senate will agree with this bill. Each and every one of us took the same oath to abide by and uphold our Constitution. The Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act does just that.

Overheard on CNN.com: Unmanned drones ignite domestic surveillance debate

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Rand Paul.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 0852 GMT (1652 HKT)
JR's "Inside Out" project pushes the boundary of creating more human interactions.
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 0057 GMT (0857 HKT)
With guest Rep. Keith Ellison, John Avlon, Margaret Hoover and Dean Obeidallah discuss the president's scandal trifecta, hope for immigration and what Jolie's revelation means for women.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1922 GMT (0322 HKT)
Roger Colinvaux says the IRS scandal is fundamentally about disclosure of donors, not tax-exempt status.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 2057 GMT (0457 HKT)
Theater critic Kevin Williamson was kicked out of a play when he took the phone away from an audience member and threw it. He says it was worth it.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1556 GMT (2356 HKT)
Mike Downey says Los Angeles has well-funded but clueless sports teams.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1552 GMT (2352 HKT)
Grace Liu says It's time for some tiger cubs to approvingly roar for our strict and demanding parents
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1157 GMT (1957 HKT)
Sens. Al Franken and Roger Wicker say we need a strong SEC to make sure credit ratings fraud doesn't bring down the economy again.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1149 GMT (1949 HKT)
Alex Castellanos says Chris Matthews is wrong; the Washington controversies result from a government that is too big to control
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 1425 GMT (2225 HKT)
U.S. actor Angelina Jolie (L) holds daughter Zahara as husband and actor Brad Pitt (C) carries son Maddox during a stroll on the seafront promenade at the historic Gateway of India outside their hotel in Mumbai on November 12, 2006.
Gil Welch says women must not panic over Angelina Jolie's mastectomies: 99% of women don't carry the BRCA1 gene.
May 16, 2013 -- Updated 1425 GMT (2225 HKT)
LZ Granderson says instead of reducing the blood alcohol content threshold, how about enforcing existing laws better?
May 16, 2013 -- Updated 1514 GMT (2314 HKT)
Maia Goodell says the military should use civil legal remedies on sexual assault cases.
May 16, 2013 -- Updated 1050 GMT (1850 HKT)
Donna Brazile says the lack of transparency and due process at GOP-led hearings shows their true intent: to damage Clinton's presidential prospects and Obama's credibility.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1109 GMT (1909 HKT)
Laura Wexler says Angelina Jolie's openness about her mastectomy fits into a pattern of celebrities who have shared secrets and helped others
May 16, 2013 -- Updated 1737 GMT (0137 HKT)
Simon Tisdall says a gruesome video might further damage the already challenged reputation and credibility of the Syrian opposition.
May 16, 2013 -- Updated 1616 GMT (0016 HKT)
Rand Paul says firing the acting head of the agency isn't enough of a remedy to the abuses that endangered individual rights
May 15, 2013 -- Updated 2026 GMT (0426 HKT)
Michael Harley says to give Tesla Model S the "best" trophy is presumptuous - it is pioneering but not flawless
ADVERTISEMENT