Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Failing To Keep The Cat In The Bag: A Decennial Assessment Of Federal Rule Of Evidence 502'S Impact On Forfeiture Of Legal Privilege Under Customary Waiver Doctrine, Jared S. Sunshine

Cleveland State Law Review

Federal Rule of Evidence 502—providing certain exemptions from the surrender of attorney-client and work product privilege because a confidential item was disclosed—had great expectations to live up to after its enactment in 2008, as Congress and others heralded it as a panacea to litigation’s woes in the face of bourgeoning discovery. The enacted rule was the subject of much skepticism by the academic punditocracy, however. Ten years later, this Article surveys the actual results and finds that, regrettably, pessimism has proven the better prediction. Percolation of debate over the rule’s many ambiguities and courts’ disparate approaches ...

The Indiscretion Of Friends: Fourth Amendment Concerns About The Ability To Predict A Person’S Online Social Activity By Monitoring Her Contacts, George M. Dery Iii

Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology

No abstract provided.

Adapting U.S. Electronic Surveillance Laws, Policies, And Practices To Reflect Impending Technological Developments, Eric Manpearl

Catholic University Law Review

Intelligence collection must always evolve to meet technological developments. While the collection programs under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 have produced a great deal of valuable intelligence over the last decade, the United States must begin to think about foreseeable technological developments and strategically consider how to conduct signals intelligence (SIGINT) collection in the future.

This Article identifies four technological trends that could significantly impact the way the United States conducts SIGINT. Individuals now have access to sophisticated technologies that formerly only governments seemed capable of creating, and this decentralization of capabilities will likely only increase ...

Peffer V. Stephens: Probable Cause, Searches And Seizures Within The Home, And Why Using Technology Should Not Open Your Front Door, Shane Landers

Texas A&M Law Review

The Fourth Amendment provides for the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Search warrants may only be issued upon a finding of probable cause. This core tenet of our constitutional republic becomes progressively flexible with every development in Fourth Amendment interpretation. In Peffer v. Stephens, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit delivered the latest blow to constitutional rights that restrict the State from engaging in unprincipled searches. In an issue of first impression, the Sixth Circuit held that a criminal defendant’s alleged ...

Cryptocurrencies' Revolt Against The Bsa: Why The Supreme Court Should Hold That The Bank Secrecy Act Violates The Fourth Amendment, Jeremy Ciarabellini

Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law

The Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) creates a Hobson’s choice: one must either struggle to function in modern society without a bank account or submit to financial surveillance by the government. Both choices result in drastic consequences.

The Needle And The Damage Done: Mitchell V. Wisconsin'S Sweeping Rule For Warrantless Blood Draws On Unconscious Dui Suspects, Dyllan Taxman

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

In a normal year, the annual death toll from drunk driving accidents in the United States will roughly equal the total number of victims of the September 11th terrorist attacks and service members killed in the War on Terror combined. And while every state has enacted increasingly progressive laws to prevent and punish driving under the influence (DUI), episodes of drunk driving remain consistent year to year and less than one percent of self-reported drunk drivers are arrested. Drunken and drugged driving is, both in lay terms and legally speaking, a compelling public issue. But the Fourth Amendment of the ...

Limited Privacy In “Pings:” Why Law Enforcement’S Use Of Cell-Site Simulators Does Not Categorically Violate The Fourth Amendment, Lara M. Mcmahon

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Note proposes four factors courts should consider when asked to determine whether law enforcement’s use of a cell-site simulator constituted a Fourth Amendment search. The first asks courts to consider whether the cell-site simulator surveillance infringed on a constitutionally protected area, such as the home. The second asks courts to consider the duration of the cell-site simulator surveillance. The third asks courts to consider whether the cell-site simulator surveillance was conducted actively or passively. The fourth asks courts to focus on the nature and depth of the information obtained as a result of the cell-site simulator surveillance. If ...

International Impact Of The Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use Of Data (Cloud) Act And Suggested Amendments To Improve Foreign Relations, Jordan A. Klumpp

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

State V. Pinkham: Erosion Of Meaningful Forth Amendment Protection For Vehicle Stops In Maine?, Roger M. Clement Jr.

Maine Law Review

In State v. Pinkham, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that a police officer's stop of a motorist to inquire and advise about the motorist's improper-but not illegal-lane usage did not necessarily violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable seizures. The Pinkham decision is the first time that the Law Court has validated the stop of a moving vehicle in the absence of either a suspected violation of law or an imminent, ongoing threat to highway safety.
This Note considers whether the Law Court was correct in sustaining the police officer's ...

Please Stop: The Law Court's Recent Roadblock Decisions, Jonathan A. Block

Maine Law Review

Police checkpoints or “roadblocks” have become an increasingly utilized law enforcement tool. At best, these checkpoints result in only a minor inconvenience to motorists. When abused, however, roadblocks have the potential for invidious invasions of privacy and personal freedom. Roadblocks are designed to deter, and to a lesser extent detect, criminal activity by stopping everyone—both the guilty and the law-abiding—for a brief inspection, thereby impinging to some degree on one's freedom of travel, privacy, and “right to be let alone.” Such “seizures” must be “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment in order to survive constitutional challenge. The major ...

An Insufficient Screening: The Constitutionality Of Michigan’S Newborn Screening Program, Anne Hart

Boston College Law Review

In June 2019, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Kanuszewski v. Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, declined to answer whether Michigan’s mandatory newborn screening program violated parents’ fundamental rights to control the medical care of their children, as well as whether the screening constituted an unconstitutional infringement of their children’s Fourth Amendment protections. As a matter of first impression, the Sixth Circuit dismissed these claims under the doctrine of qualified immunity, declining to exercise its discretion to answer the underlying constitutional claims. Although the Sixth Circuit correctly dismissed the defendants on qualified immunity grounds, it ...

Fisa Section 702: Does Querying Incidentally Collected Information Constitute A Search Under The Fourth Amendment?, Rachel G. Miller

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

An inherent source of conflict in the United States exists between protecting national security and safeguarding individual civil liberties. Throughout history, Americans have consistently been skeptical and fearful of the government abusing its power by spying on Americans. In an effort to curtail government abuses through surveillance, President Carter and Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). The purpose of FISA was to establish a “statutory procedure authorizing the use of electronic surveillance in the United States for foreign intelligence purposes.” FISA provides the government with the authority to engage in electronic surveillance, targeted at foreign powers ...

Tinker-Ing With Machine Learning: The Legality And Consequences Of Online Surveillance Of Students, Amy B. Cyphert

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Hey Siri, How Does The Judicial System Treat Searches And Seizures Of Electronic Devices? Here’S What I Found, Sandy Davis

Mercer Law Review

In a world where access to an expansive array of information is open and freely available from our back pockets, entrenched legal notions such as privacy and property come to the fore. More to the point, the Fourth Amendment test for balancing government and possessory interests plays an ever-expanding role in shaping how government agencies search and seize our electronic devices—or more precisely, our “virtual homes.”

When the government searches and seizes personal property, it must do so within the scope of Fourth Amendment reasonableness. When that personal property is an electronic device, such a search and seizure must ...

Watt Now?: Smart Meter Data Post-Carpenter, Sarah Murphy

Boston College Law Review

Smart meters, which automatically relay energy consumption data to utility companies, are increasingly displacing traditional energy meters. Data collected from smart meters has elicited widespread concern because it can reveal considerable information about what goes on inside a home. For example, smart meter data can uncover when a person is home, away, or asleep. Historically, utility records have not been afforded Fourth Amendment protection due to the third-party doctrine: a person forfeits Fourth Amendment rights when information is voluntarily conveyed to third parties. In 2018, however, the Supreme Court in Carpenter v. United States recognized an individual’s Fourth Amendment ...

Revitalizing Fourth Amendment Protections: A True Totality Of The Circumstances Test In § 1983 Probable Cause Determinations, Ryan Sullivan

College of Law, Faculty Publications

The Article analyzes claims of police misconduct and false arrest, specifically addressing the issue of whether a police officer may ignore evidence of an affirmative defense, such as self-defense, when determining probable cause for an arrest. The inquiry most often arises in § 1983 civil claims for false arrest where the officer was aware of some evidence a crime had been committed, but was also aware of facts indicating the suspect had an affirmative defense to the crime observed. In extreme cases, the affirmative defense at issue is actually self-defense in response to the officer’s own unlawful conduct. As police ...

The Fourth Amendment Implications Of "U.S. Imitation Judges", Mary P. Holper

Boston College Law School Faculty Papers

Scholars, immigration judges, attorneys, and congressional committees have been calling for a truly independent immigration adjudication system for decades, critiquing a system in which some judges describe themselves as “U.S. imitation judges.” This Article examines the lack of truly independent immigration judges (IJs) through the lens of the Fourth Amendment, which applies when a noncitizen is arrested for deportation. In 1975, the Supreme Court held in Gerstein v. Pugh that to continue detention after an initial arrest in the criminal context, the detached judgment of a neutral judge is necessary; a prosecutor’s finding of probable cause is insufficient ...

A Right To Go Dark (?), David C. Gray

SMU Law Review

In 2013, reports based on documents leaked by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden revealed committed efforts by federal agencies to develop and deploy data surveillance technologies. These revelations documented the ability of government agencies to monitor internet usage, read the contents of communications, and access data stored in the cloud and on personal devices. These revelations marked a turning point in the public conversation as consumers became aware of the extent to which national security and law enforcement agencies can monitor a wide range of activities in physical and virtual spaces.

The market responded. Technology companies began to ...

42nd Annual Foulston-Siefkin Lecture: The Next Wave Of Fourth Amendment Challenges After Carpenter, Matthew Tokson

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

This is an edited and adapted version of the 42nd Annual Foulston Siefkin Lecture, delivered at Washburn University School of Law.

The lecture discusses the future of Fourth Amendment law following the Supreme Court’s enormously important decision in Carpenter v. United States. It analyzes Carpenter and argues that its detailed account of the privacy harms caused by government surveillance will be its most important legacy. Moreover, the Court’s emphasis on the risk of privacy harm is not a one-off or a sharp break from previous practice. Carpenter is consistent with a long line of Supreme Court decisions ignoring ...

Saving America’S Privacy Rights: Why Carpenter V. United States Was Wrongly Decided And Why Courts Should Be Promoting Legislative Reform Rather Than Extending Existing Privacy Jurisprudence, David Stone

St. Mary's Law Journal

Privacy rights are under assault, but the Supreme Court’s judicial intervention into the issue, starting with Katz v. United States and leading to the Carpenter v. United States decision has created an inconsistent, piecemeal common law of privacy that forestalls a systematic public policy resolution by Congress and the states. In order to reach a satisfactory and longlasting resolution of the problem consistent with separation of powers principles, the states should consider a constitutional amendment that reduces the danger of pervasive technologyaided surveillance and monitoring, together with a series of statutes addressing each new issue posed by technological change ...