Privacy Law Commons^™

A Third-Party Doctrine For Digital Metadata, H. Brian Holland

Faculty Scholarship

For more than four decades, the third-party doctrine was understood as a bright-line, categorical rule: there is no legitimate privacy interest in any data that is voluntarily disclosed or conveyed to a third party. But this simple rule has dramatic effects in a world of ubiquitous networked computing, mobile technologies, and the commodification of information. The digital devices that facilitate our daily participation in modern society are connected through automated infrastructures that are designed to generate vast quantities of data, nearly all of which is captured, utilized, and stored by third-party service providers. Under a plain reading of the third-party …

The Exclusionary Rule In The Age Of Blue Data, Andrew Ferguson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

In Herring v. United States, Chief Justice John Roberts reframed the Supreme Court’s understanding of the exclusionary rule: “As laid out in our cases, the exclusionary rule serves to deter deliberate, reckless, or grossly negligent conduct, or in some circumstances recurring or systemic negligence.” The open question remains: how can defendants demonstrate sufficient recurring or systemic negligence to warrant exclusion? The Supreme Court has never answered the question, although the absence of systemic or recurring problems has figured prominently in two recent exclusionary rule decisions. Without the ability to document recurring failures, or patterns of police misconduct, courts can dismiss …

Jurisdiction, The Internet, And The Good Faith Exception: Controversy Over The Government’S Use Of Network Investigative Techniques, Maureen Weidman

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

In February 2015, the FBI discovered a website dedicated to child pornography located on the Tor Network, a network designed to protect its users’ identities on the Internet. Due to the structure of the Tor Network, the FBI could not take down the website and identify users who previously accessed the website. Instead, the FBI kept the website operational for 30 days and applied for a search warrant in the Eastern District of Virginia to use a device called a Network Investigative Technique (“NIT”). This device operated similarly to malware and “attached” to computers accessing the website, allowing the government …

Fourth Amendment Anxiety, Stephen E. Henderson, Kiel Brennan-Marquez

Stephen E Henderson

The Fourth Amendment Disclosure Doctrines, Monu Bedi

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The third party and public disclosure doctrines (together the “disclosure doctrines”) are long-standing hurdles to Fourth Amendment protection. These doctrines have become increasingly relevant to assessing the government’s use of recent technologies such as data mining, drone surveillance, and cell site location data. It is surprising then that both the Supreme Court and scholars, at times, have associated them together as expressing one principle. It turns out that each relies on unique foundational triggers and does not stand or fall with the other. This Article tackles this issue and provides a comprehensive topology for analyzing the respective contours of each …

Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens

Seattle University Law Review

This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …

Indecent Exposure: Do Warrantless Searches Of Cell Phones Violate The Fourth Amendment?, Amy Vorenberg

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article argues that searches of student’s cell phone should require a warrant in most circumstances. The amount and personal nature of information on a smart phone warrants special Fourth Amendment protection. This issue is particularly relevant in the public school setting where administrators routinely confiscate phones from students caught using them in school. With more frequency, administrators are looking at the phones, scrolling through text messages and photos, and on some occasions, responding to text messages.

The U.S. Supreme Court in Safford v. Redding, acknowledges the special considerations that school children should be afforded in part because of the …

Electronic Evidence In Canada, Robert Currie, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This chapter discusses the issues surrounding electronic evidence in Canada. Topics discussed include the best evidence rule, electronic signatures, web-based evidence, and video-tape and security camera evidence. In addition rules around protection of privacy, discovery, and confidentiality are pursued. Finally the chapter also considers the many issues which arise around gathering electronic evidence in the criminal context, including wiretaps, general warrants, and searches of computers and cell phones.

A “Special Need” For Change: Fourth Amendment Problems And Solutions Regarding Dna Databanking, Brendan Burke

Brendan Burke

Every state and the federal government have laws mandating DNA sampling from certain criminal offenders. Convicts’ DNA information is then stored in state and nationwide databanks for use in investigating crimes that the convicts might commit in the future. Law enforcement professionals applaud this system; civil libertarians abhor it. Because this is essentially a seizure of blood without probable cause, mandatory DNA sampling has been subject to close Fourth Amendment scrutiny. Courts have traditionally upheld mandatory DNA sampling statutes under the special-needs exception to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause requirement, a doctrine that allows for administrative or regulatory searches if …