Law Commons^™

Text Offenders: Privacy, Text Messages, And The Failure Of The Title Iii Minimization Requirement, Seth M. Hyatt

Vanderbilt Law Review

For the past forty years, theory and practice in electronic surveillance have enjoyed an uneasy coexistence. In theory, under ("Title III"), government agents must use wire and electronic taps sparingly, and only under strict judicial supervision. In practice, however, federal courts have recognized countless loopholes and exceptions, leading critics to wonder whether Title III meaningfully limits state investigatory power.

Nowhere is this tension more apparent than in the context of "minimization." Under Title III, government agents conducting electronic surveillance must "minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception under this chapter." They must not listen in on any …

Along For The Ride: Gps And The Fourth Amendment, Stephen A. Josey

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

With the advent of new technologies, the line as to where the Fourth Amendment forbids certain police behavior and when it does not has become increasingly blurred. Recently, the issue of whether police may use Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking devices to track individuals for prolonged periods of time without first securing a search warrant has crept its way into the limelight. The various circuits have arrived at different conclusions, and the question has now found its way onto the US Supreme Court's docket. After analyzing and weighing both Supreme Court case law and public policy considerations, this Note concludes …

Cloudy Privacy Protections: Why The Stored Communications Act Fails To Protect The Privacy Of Communications Stored In The Cloud, Ilana R. Kattan

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The advent of new communications technologies has generated debate over the applicability of the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement to communications sent through, and stored in, technologies not anticipated by the Framers. In 1986, Congress responded to perceived gaps in the protections of the warrant requirement as applied to newer technologies, such as email, by passing the Stored Communications Act (SCA). As originally enacted, the SCA attempted to balance the interests of law enforcement against individual privacy rights by dictating the mechanisms by which the government could compel a particular service provider to disclose communications stored on behalf of its customers. …

Putting The Shock Value In First Amendment Jurisprudence: When Freedom For The Citizen-Journalist Watchdog Trumps The Right Of Informational Privacy On The Internet, Clay Calvert, Mirelis Torres

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Article, which takes the July 2010 ruling by the Fourth Circuit in Ostergren v. Cuccinelli as a point of departure, explores the growing tension between the First Amendment right of Free Speech and the nascent right to online informational privacy. The Article addresses the "shock value" in First Amendment jurisprudence, stretching from Cohen v. California and Texas v. Johnson through the recent ruling in Ostergren. The Article also examines the traditional watchdog function of the press increasingly performed on the Internet by so-called citizen-journalists akin to Betty Ostergren. The Article concludes that while the Fourth Circuit's decision in Ostergren …

The Double-Helix Double-Edged Sword: Comparing Dna Retention Policies Of The United States And The United Kingdom, Erica S. Deray

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Forensic scientists have used DNA profiling technologies to link suspects to crimes since Alec Jeffreys first proposed the idea in the 1970s. Recognizing the potential for using DNA databases to solve crimes and to prevent future crimes, England and Wales attempted to greatly expand its DNA database by allowing for the collection and indefinite retention of DNA profiles from arrestees. The European Court of Human Rights, however, issued a ruling in 2008 in the case of S. & Marper v. United Kingdom, advising the United Kingdom to restrict use of DNA profiles from arrestees and to establish time frames for …