Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Forced Decryption As Equilibrium—Why It’S Constitutional And How Riley Matters, Dan Terzian
Forced Decryption As Equilibrium—Why It’S Constitutional And How Riley Matters, Dan Terzian
Northwestern University Law Review
This Essay considers whether the government can force a person to decrypt his computer. The only courts to consider the issue limited their analyses to rote application of predigital doctrine and dicta. This is a mistake; courts should instead aim to maintain the ex ante equilibrium of privacy and government power. This approach—seeking equilibrium—was just endorsed by the Supreme Court in Riley v. California, a recent Fourth Amendment case. Yet Riley’s rationale also extends to the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination Clause, and maintaining equilibrium there requires permitting forced decryption. Because current doctrine can be interpreted as allowing forced decryption, …
Reviving The Privacy Protection Act Of 1980, Elizabeth B. Uzelac
Reviving The Privacy Protection Act Of 1980, Elizabeth B. Uzelac
Northwestern University Law Review
The federal privacy legislative scheme is composed of a fragmented patchwork of aging sector-specific statutes—many enacted prior to the advent of the home computer—that supplement the Fourth Amendment to regulate government access to information. The Privacy Protection Act of 1980 is one such statute, though few understand or utilize its protections. The Act prohibits law enforcement officials from searching for or seizing information from people who disseminate information to the public, such as reporters. Where it applies, the Act requires law enforcement officials to instead rely on compliance with a subpoena or the target’s voluntary cooperation to gain access to …
Mug Shot Disclosure Under Foia: Does Privacy Or Public Interest Prevail?, Kathryn Shephard
Mug Shot Disclosure Under Foia: Does Privacy Or Public Interest Prevail?, Kathryn Shephard
Northwestern University Law Review
No abstract provided.