Writing at the Washington Post, Jeffrey Rosen, president of the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, says that the controversial law should be reformed because Americans are being exposed to invasive technology.
Suggested Reading
The problem with the government's handling of surveillance since Sept. 11, 2001, comes down to the choice of the naked machine over the blob machine.
In 2002, the Transportation Safety Administration had to pick between two airport screening technologies: one that showed graphic images of a passenger's naked body and one that represented the body as a nondescript blob, with arrows pointing to the areas that required secondary screening. Because both technologies promised the same amount of security, while one also protected privacy, you would think the choice between them would be a no-brainer. In fact, both the Bush and the Obama administrations supported the wide deployment of the naked machine over the blob machine.
It took a political protest — represented by the Patrick Henry of the anti-body-scanner movement, the gentleman who in 2010 exclaimed to a TSA agent, "Don't touch my junk" — to persuade the Obama administration and Congress to reconsider. This year, the TSA removed the invasive technology from major airports and replaced it with more privacy-protective machines.
Yet we remain unnecessarily exposed. Repeatedly, our government has chosen technologies, policies and laws that reveal innocent information without making us demonstrably safer …
Read Jeffrey Rosen's entire piece at the Washington Post.
The Root aims to foster and advance conversations about issues relevant to the black Diaspora by presenting a variety of opinions from all perspectives, whether or not those opinions are shared by our editorial staff.
Straight From 
Sign up for our free daily newsletter.