Freedom of the Press, Unreasonable searches, Right to keep and bear arms?

The problem is when we use a telephone or the internet, those records are not ours, they belong to the company. So the government is not violating the 4th amendment because corporations are not people and have privileges not rights. Government can say to a corporation "give us your records" and they have to do it.

US Supreme Court:

Hale v. Henkel - 201 U.S. 43 (1906)

Conceding that the witness was an officer of the corporation under investigation, and that he was entitled to assert the rights of corporation with respect to the production of its books and papers, we are of the opinion that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books and papers for an examination at the suit of the State. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.

Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the State. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the State and the limitations of its charter. Its powers are limited by law. It can make no contract not authorized by its charter. Its rights to

Page 201 U. S. 75

act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is a reserved right in the legislature to investigate its contracts and find out whether it has exceeded its powers. It would be a strange anomaly to hold that a State, having chartered a corporation to make use of certain franchises, could not, in the exercise of its sovereignty, inquire how these franchises had been employed, and whether they had been abused, and demand the production of the corporate books and papers for that purpose. The defense amounts to this: that an officer of a corporation which is charged with a criminal violation of the statute may plead the criminality of such corporation as a refusal to produce its books. To state this proposition is to answer it. While an individual may lawfully refuse to answer incriminating questions unless protected by an immunity statute, it does not follow that a corporation, vested with special privileges and franchises, may refuse to show its hand when charged with an abuse of such privileges.

The real question you should be asking yourself is, why didn't you complain more vociferously about these programs 12 years ago when the Patriot Act was signed? Seven years ago when the story of spying on American citizens first broke? It seems you don't mind Republicans sniffing around your yard, but as soon as a Democrat (or is it because he's half black?) gets into office, you cry about the Fourth Amendment. Real liberals have been calling the president out on this since his second year in office.

I think Ben Franklin said it best...

" He who sacrifices Freedom for security, deserves neither"...