Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Fourth Amendment (4)
- Jurisprudence (4)
- Law and Society (4)
- Privacy; Surveillance; United States v. Jones (4)
-
- Human Rights Law (2)
- Privacy; Surveillance; Fourth Amendment; United States v. Jones (2)
- 2008 term (1)
- Bivens Doctrin (1)
- Constitutional Law; Search & Seizure; Linguistics; Constitutional Amendments (1)
- Constitutional rights (1)
- Correction officers (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Federal constitutional rights (1)
- Martin Schwartz (1)
- Municipalities (1)
- October 2008 Term (1)
- Pleading requirements (1)
- Prosecutorial immunity (1)
- Qualifed immunity (1)
- Schwartz (1)
- Section 1983 (1)
- Section 1983 litigation (1)
- State court Section 1983 actions (1)
- Suing a municipality (1)
- Supervisory liability (1)
- Supreme court (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
A Linguistic Analysis Of The Meanings Of "Search" In The Fourth Amendment: A Search For Common Sense, Clark D. Cunningham
A Linguistic Analysis Of The Meanings Of "Search" In The Fourth Amendment: A Search For Common Sense, Clark D. Cunningham
Clark D. Cunningham
This article offers a new technique for analyzing and evaluating competing interpretations of a legal text and applies that technique to one of the most debated questions of modern constitutional interpretation: the meaning of "searches" in the first clause of the fourth amendment. This Technique is called the "common sense" approach because it begins with a semantic analysis of the text in terms of the sense that the key words have in everyday speech. Such analysis reveals a complex of interlocked concepts that underlies the ability of speakers to recognize meaningful uses of these words. The common sense approach then …
The Constitution And Informational Privacy, Or How So-Called Conservatives Countenance Governmental Intrustion Into A Person's Private Affairs, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 871 (1985), Michael P. Seng
Michael P. Seng
No abstract provided.
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
David C. Gray
We are at the cusp of a historic shift in our conceptions of the Fourth Amendment driven by dramatic advances in surveillance technology. Governments and their private sector agents continue to invest billions of dollars in massive data-mining projects, advanced analytics, fusion centers, and aerial drones, all without serious consideration of the constitutional issues that these technologies raise. In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court signaled an end to its silent acquiescence in this expanding surveillance state. In that case, five justices signed concurring opinions defending a revolutionary proposition: that citizens have Fourth Amendment interests in substantial quantities of …
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
David C. Gray
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In that case, officers used a GPS-enabled device to track a suspect’s public movements for four weeks, amassing a considerable amount of data in the process. Although ultimately resolved on narrow grounds, five Justices joined concurring opinions in Jones expressing sympathy for some version of the “mosaic theory” of Fourth Amendment privacy. This theory holds that we maintain reasonable expectations of privacy in certain quantities of information even if we do not have such expectations in the constituent parts. This Article examines and explores …
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
Danielle Keats Citron
We are at the cusp of a historic shift in our conceptions of the Fourth Amendment driven by dramatic advances in surveillance technology. Governments and their private sector agents continue to invest billions of dollars in massive data-mining projects, advanced analytics, fusion centers, and aerial drones, all without serious consideration of the constitutional issues that these technologies raise. In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court signaled an end to its silent acquiescence in this expanding surveillance state. In that case, five justices signed concurring opinions defending a revolutionary proposition: that citizens have Fourth Amendment interests in substantial quantities of …
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
Danielle Keats Citron
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In that case, officers used a GPS-enabled device to track a suspect’s public movements for four weeks, amassing a considerable amount of data in the process. Although ultimately resolved on narrow grounds, five Justices joined concurring opinions in Jones expressing sympathy for some version of the “mosaic theory” of Fourth Amendment privacy. This theory holds that we maintain reasonable expectations of privacy in certain quantities of information even if we do not have such expectations in the constituent parts. This Article examines and explores …
Constitutional Litigation Under Section 1983 And The Bivens Doctrine In The October 2008 Term, Martin A. Schwartz
Constitutional Litigation Under Section 1983 And The Bivens Doctrine In The October 2008 Term, Martin A. Schwartz
Martin A. Schwartz
Section 1983 is the major enforcer of individual federal constitutional rights. It authorizes individuals to enforce their constitutional rights against state and local officials; for example,prison officers and police officers, and against municipalities. It is the most important civil statute in American law. To its credit, the United States Supreme Court understands the significance of § 1983. For the past three decades, in virtually every single Term of theCourt, it has decided a substantial number of cases dealing with different facets of § 1983 litigation. Last Term, there was anunusual number of § 1983 decisions rendered by the United States …