Law Commons^™

Wire(Less) Tapping: Protecting Arkansans' Fourth Amendment Right In The Era Of The Cloud, Erin James

Arkansas Law Review

Every day we surround ourselves with dozens of devices that monitor our every move, every request, all connecting with one another and sending massive amounts of data back to the device manufacturers. The idea of the prosecution placing the little black cylinder of your Amazon Alexa on the witness stand and asking Alexa to testify against you seems like something pulled from an Orwellian nightmare. But, in reality, it is already occurring.

Cell-Site Location Information And The Privacies Of Life: The Impact Of Carpenter V. United States, Trevor Moore

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 as …

Protecting Online Privacy In The Digital Age: Carpenter V. United States And The Fourth Amendment’S Third-Party Doctrine, Cristina Del Rosso, Carol M. Bast

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

The goal of this paper is to examine the future of the third-party doctrine with the proliferation of technology and the online data we are surrounded with daily, specifically after the Supreme Court’s decision in Carpenter v. United States. It is imperative that individuals do not forfeit their Constitutional guarantees for the benefit of living in a technologically advanced society. This requires an understanding of the modern-day functional equivalents of “papers” and “effects.”

Looking to the future, this paper contemplates solutions on how to move forward in this technology era by scrutinizing the relevancy of the third-party doctrine due …