Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Trust: A Model For Disclosure In Patent Law, Ari Ezra Waldman

Indiana Law Journal

How to draw the line between public and private is a foundational, first-principles question of privacy law, but the answer has implications for intellectual property, as well. This project is one in a series of papers about first-person disclosures of information in the privacy and intellectual property law contexts, and it defines the boundary between public and nonpublic information through the lens of social science —namely, principles of trust.

Patent law’s public use bar confronts the question of whether legal protection should extend to information previously disclosed to a small group of people. I present evidence that shows that current …

A Tactical Fourth Amendment, Brandon L. Garrett, Seth W. Stoughton

Faculty Publications

What rules regulate when police can kill? As ongoing public controversy over high-profile police killings drives home, the civil, criminal, and administrative rules governing police use of force all remain deeply contested. Members of the public may assume that police rules and procedures provide detailed direction for when officers can use deadly force. However, many agencies train officers to respond to threats according to a force “continuum” that does not provide hardedged rules for when or how police can use force or deadly force. Nor, as recent cases have illustrated, does a criminal prosecution under state law readily lend itself …

The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo

Fordham Law Review

This Note explores the CSLI debate by analyzing the circuit courts’ decisions, scholars’ disagreement with those decisions, and the alternative approaches offered to protect and evaluate CSLI records. This Note concludes that warrantless CSLI monitoring should be analyzed under the “mosaic theory” of the Fourth Amendment. In support, it argues that this theory best addresses the concerns with CSLI tracking and proposes a standard that courts may use to apply it.

The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo

Fordham Law Review

This Note explores the CSLI debate by analyzing the circuit courts’ decisions, scholars’ disagreement with those decisions, and the alternative approaches offered to protect and evaluate CSLI records. This Note concludes that warrantless CSLI monitoring should be analyzed under the “mosaic theory” of the Fourth Amendment. In support, it argues that this theory best addresses the concerns with CSLI tracking and proposes a standard that courts may use to apply it.

Rethinking The Fourth Amendment In The Age Of Supercomputers, Artificial Intelligence, And Robots, Melanie Reid

West Virginia Law Review

In an era of diminishing privacy, the Internet of Things ("loT") has become a consensual and inadvertent tool that undermines privacy protection. The loT, really systems of networks connected to each other by the Internet or other radio-type device, creates consensual mass self-surveillance in such domains as fitness and the Fitbit, health care and heart monitors, "smart" houses and cars, and even "smart" cities. The multiple networks also have created a degree of interconnectivity that has opened up a fire hose of information for companies and governments alike, as well as making it virtually insuperable to live "off the grid" …

Drinking From The Fire Hose: How Massive Self-Surveillance From The Internet Of Things Is Changing The Face Of Privacy, Steven I. Friedland

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Omg - Not Something To Lol About: The Unintended Results Of Disallowing Warrantless Searches Of Cell Phones Incident To A Lawful Arrest Comments, Parker Jenkins

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court To Rule On Police Shooting Case: Excessive Force And Qualified Immunity, Natalie Lakosil

GGU Law Review Blog

Currently, a circuit split exists regarding the Ninth Circuit’s Provocation Rule. The deputies argue that Graham applies and that officers need to be free to make split‑second choices to respond to threats of force without stopping to replay their prior actions and evaluate whether someone might later accuse them of provoking the situation. Although this is true, some argue that officers should also be required to follow the Constitution in the first place and held liable if they cause the force to be used. The holding in Scott supports this type of analysis. While Graham allows for qualified immunity by …

Upholding Citizens’ Privacy In The Use Of Stingray Technology: Is New York Behind?, Samantha Hazen

Pace Law Review

This Comment will argue that New York should follow the federal agencies’ and states’ leads by imposing a warrant requirement supported by probable cause on local and state agencies that wish to use Stingray technology in their investigations. The first section will explore Stingray technology and how it works. The second section will frame the issue and describe New York’s current standard. The third section will discuss the judicial response to the issue and how New York courts seem to place the burden of upholding privacy on the citizen, instead of the government. The third section will also discuss a …

Stubbornness Of Pretexts, Daniel B. Yeager

Daniel B. Yeager

This Article will reflect on (1) how the Whren v. United States failure to acknowledge what counts as a pretext accounts for the residual confusion as to whether or not Whren really has killed off the pretext argument in constitutional criminal procedure, and (2) the extent to which the Court in Sullivan compounded that failure, which I hope to lightly correct here by distinguishing motives from intentions and then by elaborating the role that each plays, or at least should play, in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.

Search, Seizure And The Positive Law: Expectations Of Privacy Outside The Fourth Amendment, Daniel B. Yeager

Daniel B. Yeager

This Article is about the misunderstood relationship between the Fourth Amendment and the positive law. It shows how state property law and other expressions of the positive law are more resilient and useful to Fourth Amendment analysis than the Court's decisions of the past three decades recognize.

Overcoming Hiddenness: The Role Of Intentions In Fourth Amendment Analysis, Daniel B. Yeager

Daniel B. Yeager

This Article rehearses a response to the problems posed to and by the Supreme Court's attempts to work out the meaning and operation of the word "search." After commencing Part II by meditating on the notion of privacy, I take up its relation to the antecedent suspicion or knowledge that Fourth-Amendment law requires as a justification for all privacy invasions. From there, I look specifically at that uneasy relation in Supreme Court jurisprudence, which has come to privilege privacy over property as a Fourth Amendment value. From there, Part III reviews the sources or bases that can tell us what …

Some Observations On The Supreme Court's Use Of Property Concepts In Resolving Fourth Amendment Problems, Fernand N. Dutile

Fernand "Tex" N. Dutile

No abstract provided.

Civil Liberty Or National Security: The Battle Over Iphone Encryption, Karen Lowell

Georgia State University Law Review

On June 5, 2013, Edward Snowden released what would be the first of many documents exposing the vast breadth of electronic surveillance the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National Security Agency (NSA) had been conducting on millions of United States citizens. Although the federal agencies had legal authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to collect metadata from companies such as Verizon, many Americans considered this data collection to be a massive invasion of privacy.

Equipped with the knowledge of sweeping domestic surveillance programs, citizens and technology firms fighting for strong privacy and security protection, have started …

Domestic Drone Surveillance: The Court’S Epistemic Challengeand Wittgenstein’S Actional Certainty, Robert Greenleaf Brice, Katrina L. Sifferd

Louisiana Law Review

The article focuses on the domestic drone surveillance in the U.S. and mentions U.S. Fourth Amendment and the different legal standards of proof that might apply to law enforcement for the use of drones; and role of U.S. Supreme Court in determining epistemic challenge of privacy.

Pricing The Fourth Amendment, Miriam Baer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Pricing The Fourth Amendment, Miriam H. Baer

William & Mary Law Review

Critics have long decried the Fourth Amendment’s lack of an adequate remedy to secure its compliance. Neither the exclusionary rule nor the threat of civil liability deters police misconduct, leaving scholars to cast about for alternative measures. The emphasis on penalties, however, overlooks a different problem: detection. Because of policing’s fast-paced nature, even so-called “flagrant” Fourth Amendment violations trigger insufficient liability due to low probabilities of detection.

This Article addresses this problem by drawing on the Pigouvian tax literature. The Pigouvian tax—sometimes referred to as a “corrective tax”—is a pricing instrument imposed by regulators in an amount equal to the …

Preventing An Air Panopticon: A Proposal For Reasonable Legal Restrictions On Aerial Surveillance, Jake Laperruque

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Digital Technology And Analog Law: Cellular Location Data, The Third-Party Doctrine, And The Law's Need To Evolve, Justin Hill

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Game Of Phones: The Fourth Amendment Implications Of Real-Time Cell Phone Tracking, Cal Cumpstone

Cleveland State Law Review

With the help of technological advancements, law enforcement can now hijack a targeted individual’s cell phone to ping and track the phone’s exact location in real time. Based upon previous rulings, this new tracking process has apparently fallen into a "grey area" of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. However, real-time cell phone tracking should be a search in terms of the Fourth Amendment and, therefore, require a warrant. Real-time cell phone tracking infringes on an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy, violates the trespass doctrine as a trespass to chattels, and violates the Kyllo standard by using technology not in general public use …