Law Commons^™

Hudson And Samson: The Roberts Court Confronts Privacy, Dignity, And The Fourth Amendment, John D. Castiglione

ExpressO

This article critically analyzes Samson v. California and Hudson v. Michigan, which were the Roberts Court's first major Fourth Amendment decisions. In Samson, the Court upheld a California law allowing government officials to search parolees without any suspicion of wrongdoing. In Hudson, to the surprise of almost every observer, the Court held that knock-and-announce violations do not carry with them a remedy of exclusion. What was most notable about Hudson was not only that it rejected what every state and every federal court, save one, believed to be the proper remedy for knock-and-announce violations, but that it called into question …

Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing Can No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Immunity From The Focused Attention Of Others: A Conceptual And Normative Model Of Personal And Legal Privacy, Jeffrey L. Johnson

Florida A & M University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tied Up In Knotts? Gps Technology And The Fourth Amendment, Renée Mcdonald Hutchins

Faculty Scholarship

Judicial and scholarly assessment of emerging technology seems poised to drive the Fourth Amendment down one of three paths. The first would simply relegate the amendment to a footnote in history books by limiting its reach to harms that the framers specifically envisioned. A modified version of this first approach would dispense with expansive constitutional notions of privacy and replace them with legislative fixes. A third path offers the amendment continued vitality but requires the U.S. Supreme Court to overhaul its Fourth Amendment analysis. Fortunately, a fourth alternative is available to cabin emerging technologies within the existing doctrinal framework. Analysis …

In Sickness, Health And Cyberspace: Protecting The Security Of Electronic Private Health Information, Sharona Hoffman, Andy Podgurski

Faculty Publications

The electronic processing of health information provides considerable benefits to patients and health care providers at the same time that it creates serious risks to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. The Internet provides a conduit for rapid and uncontrolled dispersion and trafficking of illicitly-obtained private health information, with far-reaching consequences to the unsuspecting victims. In order to address such threats to electronic private health information, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services enacted the HIPAA Security Rule, which thus far has received little attention in the legal literature. This article presents a critique of the Security …

There Is No Place Like Home: The Supreme Court's Refusal To Allow Searches Of The Home Based On Disputed Consent In Georgia V. Randolph, Kyle Evans

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Liberal Assault On The Fourth Amendment, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

As construed by the Supreme Court, the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement regulates overt, non-regulatory government searches of homes, cars, and personal effects-and virtually nothing else. This essay is primarily about how we got to this point. It is fashionable to place much of the blame for today's law on the Warren Court's adoption of the malleable expectation of privacy concept as the core value protected by the Fourth Amendment. But this diagnosis fails to explain why even the more liberal justices have often gone along with many of the privacy-diminishing holdings of the Court. This essay argues that three other …

Payton, Practical Wisdom, And The Pragmatist Judge: Is Payton's Goal To Prevent Unreasonable Entries Or To Effectuate Home Arrests?, Christos Papapetrou

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Comment analyzes the conflicting "objective" and "subjective" tests that courts use to determine if a law enforcement officer's entry into a suspect's home is valid following the Supreme Court's holding in Payton v. New York that an arrest warrant implicitly carries with it a right to enter a suspect's home when there is "reason to believe" it is the suspect's residence and that the suspect is inside. The Comment questions how courts should interpret the "reason to believe" standard and analyzes an approach put forth by Professor Matthew A. Edwards in his article, Posner's Pragmatism and Payton Home Arrests. …

The Technology Of Surveillance: Will The Supreme Court's Expectations Ever Resemble Society's?, Stephen E. Henderson

Stephen E Henderson

Beyond The (Current) Fourth Amendment: Protecting Third-Party Information, Third Parties, And The Rest Of Us Too, Stephen E. Henderson

Stephen E Henderson

For at least thirty years the Supreme Court has adhered to its third-party doctrine in interpreting the Fourth Amendment, meaning that so far as a disclosing party is concerned, information in the hands of a third party receives no Fourth Amendment protection. The doctrine was controversial when adopted, has been the target of sustained criticism, and is the predominant reason that the Katz revolution has not been the revolution many hoped it would be. Some forty years after Katz the Court's search jurisprudence largely remains tied to property conceptions. As I have demonstrated elsewhere, however, the doctrine is not the …