THE LEGAL LIMITS OF GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PRIVACY PROTECTIONS UNDER THE GDPR AND THE USA PATRIOT ACT

Abstract

State surveillance has become a source of legal and ethical controversy in the digital age, with governments trying to find the right balance between national security and personal privacy rights. This article conducts a comparative study between the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) regarding legal regimes of government surveillance resulting from the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the USA PATRIOT Act. Drawing on legislation, court decisions, and enforcement regimes, this article considers how based legal principles circumscribe surveillance and invasion of privacy. The results expose substantial differences in their respective approaches, in that the GDPR maintains stringent data protection and privacy dedicates whereas the USA PATRIOT Act focuses more on national security interests that frequently have a strong negative impact on 1st the USA privacy. The chapter concludes by exploring what these findings mean for transatlantic data flows, privacy harmonization and policy measures to confront the new surveillance challenges in an interconnected environment.