Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Privacy (3)
- Affirmative consent (1)
- Carpenter v. US (1)
- Celebrity (1)
- Cell phone (1)
-
- Cell site location information (CSLI) (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Damages (1)
- Due process (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Free speech (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- GPS (1)
- Medical data (1)
- Medical information (1)
- Privacy Act (1)
- Probable cause (1)
- Publicity (1)
- Rape (1)
- Sexual assault (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Surveillance (1)
- Title IX (1)
- United States v. Knotts (1)
- Warrant (1)
- Whalen v. Roe (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Cell Phones Are Orwell's Telescreen: The Need For Fourth Amendment Protection In Real-Time Cell Phone Location Information, Matthew Devoy Jones
Cell Phones Are Orwell's Telescreen: The Need For Fourth Amendment Protection In Real-Time Cell Phone Location Information, Matthew Devoy Jones
Cleveland State Law Review
Courts are divided as to whether law enforcement can collect cell phone location information in real-time without a warrant under the Fourth Amendment. This Article argues that Carpenter v. United States requires a warrant under the Fourth Amendment prior to law enforcement’s collection of real-time cell phone location information. Courts that have required a warrant prior to the government’s collection of real-time cell phone location information have considered the length of surveillance. This should not be a factor. The growing prevalence and usage of cell phones and cell phone technology, the original intent of the Fourth Amendment, and United States …
Keep Your Friends Close And Your Medical Records Closer: Defining The Extent To Which A Constitutional Right To Informational Privacy Protects Medical Records, Lauren Newman
Journal of Law and Health
The following Article discusses the extent to which the constitutional right to informational privacy protects medical data from improper acquisition or dissemination by state agents. Part I provides background on Whalen v. Roe, the Supreme Court case that has been understood to establish the right to informational privacy. Part I also discusses the variations across the circuit courts as to what medical information is afforded protection by the right. Part II analyzes the well-established approaches adopted by the Second and Third Circuits as they present opposing interpretations of Whalen, one wholly protecting medical information and the other protecting …
Clear As Mud: Constitutional Concerns With Clear Affirmative Consent, C. Ashley Saferight
Clear As Mud: Constitutional Concerns With Clear Affirmative Consent, C. Ashley Saferight
Cleveland State Law Review
Rape and sexual assault laws and policies have shifted significantly in recent years, including the introduction of affirmative consent. Unfortunately, both proponents and critics tend to confuse the issues and falsely equate affirmative consent as a substantive social standard versus a procedural standard for adjudication and punishment. Although affirmative consent generally does not represent a significant change in consent law in the United States, statutes and policies requiring a further requirement that affirmative consent be clear and unambiguous (“clear affirmative consent”) are problematic and raise constitutional concerns. When clear affirmative consent policies are used as an adjudicative standard, they increase …
Rights On Publicity As Remarkably Insignificant, R. George Wright
Rights On Publicity As Remarkably Insignificant, R. George Wright
Cleveland State Law Review
This Article introduces the right of publicity through a brief consideration of high-profile cases involving, respectively, Paris Hilton, human cannonball Hugo Zacchini, and the famous actress Olivia de Havilland. With this background understanding, the Article considers the supposed risks to freedom of speech posed by recognizing rights of publicity in a private party. From there, the Article addresses the nagging concern that the publicity rights cases promote a harmful "celebrification" of culture. Finally, the Article considers whether allowing for meaningful damage recoveries in publicity rights cases appropriately compensates victims in ways promoting the broad public interest.