Liberty Under Siege: The Largest Mass Surveillance Effort in American History

Before January 6th, 2021, financial surveillance in the United States was largely limited to a well-defined framework designed to combat money laundering and terrorism. Judicial oversight and clear legal protocols acted as key safeguards, ensuring that government access to citizens' financial information respected the rule of law. However, after the Capitol protests, these boundaries have shifted dramatically. Under the Biden administration, the purpose of surveillance has shifted from securing national interests to a tool for targeting political dissent—particularly individuals linked to Donald Trump and the "MAGA" movement. Take, for instance, the scrutiny faced by those who attended rallies or made donations to conservative causes; their financial transactions, travel records, and even personal communications have increasingly come under the federal microscope.

The U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary has exposed just how far-reaching this financial scrutiny has become. Their interim report revealed that federal agencies searched databases using terms like "MAGA" and "TRUMP" to identify potential threats. Activities once considered harmless—such as booking a hotel, buying a firearm, or possessing certain religious texts—are now deemed suspicious indicators. Notably, Bank of America handed over customer information for those who happened to be in Washington, D.C., during the week of January 6th, without a valid warrant, seemingly at the mere suggestion of federal agencies. Every person visiting D.C. during this time is now effectively on a federal terror watch list. Their purchases—be it firearms, ammunition, or Bibles—and their movements are now monitored in what is arguably the largest, most prolonged mass surveillance campaign aimed at a single political group in U.S. history. Army veteran and former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard reportedly found herself on the TSA's Quiet Skies watch list after endorsing Trump, illustrating how this expansive monitoring extends to high-profile individuals as well.

This encroachment blurs the critical line between justifiable law enforcement and politically motivated surveillance—a distinction that is fundamental to a functioning democracy. The consequences of this are serious, as history has shown. During the McCarthy era, baseless accusations and unfounded investigations into supposed communist sympathizers led to widespread fear, paranoia, and ruined reputations. Similarly, the FBI's COINTELPRO program during the 1960s and 70s targeted civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King Jr., using aggressive tactics to discredit and intimidate activists, which eroded public trust in government institutions. Today, we are seeing similar abuses as surveillance expands from legitimate national security threats to political targeting.

Historically, Americans have been rightly wary of sweeping government surveillance. Following the September 11th attacks, the Patriot Act significantly expanded the federal government’s authority to monitor financial transactions and private communications, but these powers were intended to be wielded with caution and focus solely on credible security threats. Today, however, the Biden administration has moved from using these tools for national defense to deploying them against political opponents. Financial records meant to combat terrorism have now been repurposed to scrutinize those associated with conservative causes, including those who attended Trump rallies. This shift represents a dramatic and dangerous departure from the original intent of these surveillance measures.

While it is critical to support law enforcement in their legitimate aims to prevent extremist threats, indiscriminately labeling "MAGA" or "TRUMP" as potential threats to national security undermines the bedrock of political liberty. The scale of this intrusion is significant: over 25,000 federal employees reportedly have access to sensitive financial data without meaningful oversight. As detailed by the House Committee on the Judiciary, there are inadequate checks—such as judicial review or independent monitoring—which allows for potential misuse and unchecked abuse of this authority. The partisan leanings of the federal workforce, which is overwhelmingly aligned with the Democratic Party, raise concerns about how political biases could guide decisions regarding surveillance.

The risks of such unchecked authority cannot be understated. The echoes of COINTELPRO's abuses—where prominent civil rights leaders were subjected to unlawful harassment—serve as a reminder of the dangers posed by unchecked surveillance powers. The shift in focus from combating credible security threats to policing political thought shows a government that is losing sight of its constitutional limitations. It doesn't matter whether the pretext is foreign threats or so-called "domestic extremism"; the result is a pervasive erosion of civil liberties and government accountability.

To restore the balance, it is imperative that the power of surveillance be curtailed. Any future administration—including one led by Donald Trump—must prioritize the reduction of federal surveillance authority, appoint leaders to federal agencies who respect constitutional limits, and establish stronger oversight mechanisms to prevent abuse. Congress also has a critical role: legislation must be enacted to curb the expansive reach of acts like the Bank Secrecy Act and eliminate broad, politically motivated data searches. These reforms are not just sensible—they are essential for ensuring that our government remains accountable to its citizens, instead of treating dissent as inherently suspect.

The erosion of political freedoms we are witnessing today may begin with those who support "America First," but it sets a dangerous precedent that could eventually target environmental activists, labor organizers, or anyone else perceived as challenging the status quo. Such chilling effects diminish free speech, deter civic participation, and threaten the very fabric of what makes this country free.

James Madison once warned that tyranny might arrive "in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy," a caution that rings true today. His concerns were rooted in the era of the Alien and Sedition Acts, where the government suppressed dissent under the cover of national security—a troubling parallel to what we now see happening in the name of preventing domestic extremism. We must understand that this is not just about a particular political ideology; it is about the survival of our republic itself. To defend American liberties, we must opt for transparency over secrecy, accountability over arbitrary authority, and the constitution over convenience.

Ultimately, a government willing to sift through citizens' financial records based on political affiliations is one that can easily curtail any freedom it chooses. Just as we witnessed with COINTELPRO's abuses, unchecked powers are inevitably misused, leading to the harassment of political opponents, the violation of civil liberties, and the degradation of public trust. The American spirit is grounded in individual rights, due process, and resistance to government overreach—principles our Founders fought to protect. As citizens, it is our duty to demand that our leaders respect these rights, end the abuse of surveillance tools, and restore a government that exists to protect, not to persecute.

If you don't already, please follow me on 𝕏 at https://x.com/amuse or medium.