Law Commons^™

Congressional Due Process, Andrew M. Wright

Andrew M Wright

This article identifies significant deficiencies in Congress’s investigative practices. Consequences of congressional scrutiny can be profound, yet the second Congress calls, almost none of the safeguards of the American legal system are present. I argue such practices demonstrate institutional indifference to constitutional due process norms. The article highlights differences between congressional and judicial proceedings with respect to the safeguards of witnesses and targets. The purpose of congressional inquiry fundamentally differs from adjudication, and therefore does not call for the full complement of procedural rights afforded in judicial proceedings. Congress seeks facts and expertise to inform legislative judgments that will have …

Calling Out Maryland V. King: Dna, Cell Phones, And The Fourth Amendment, Jennie Vee Silk

Jennie Vee Silk

In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court narrowly upheld a Maryland statute that permits police to obtain a DNA sample from an arrestee without a search warrant. A year later, the Court drastically changed course and provided significantly more protection to an arrestee’s privacy. In a unanimous decision, the Court in Riley v. California held that police must obtain a search warrant before they can search the cell phone of an arrestee.

This article is the first to compare the Court’s conflicting decisions in Riley and King. Riley and King present the same issue: governmental invasion of privacy for …

Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind

Tonja Jacobi

It is routinely assumed that there is a trade-off between police efficiency and the warrant requirement. But existing analysis ignores the interaction between police investigative practices and criminal innovation. Narrowing the definition of a search or otherwise limiting the requirement for a warrant gives criminals greater incentive to innovate to avoid detection. With limited police resources to develop countermeasures, police will often be just as effective at capturing criminals when facing higher Fourth Amendment hurdles. We provide a game theoretic model that shows that when police investigation and criminal innovation are considered in a dynamic context, the police efficiency rationale …

Checked In: Real-Time Geolocation Surveillance And The Fourth Amendment, Eric J. Struening

Eric J Struening

Leaks have revealed that the use of personal technology such as cell phones and e-mail plays a large part in how the government obtains national security information. However, it is still an open question of how far the protection of the Fourth Amendment provides an individual against government intrusion in that type of technology. This article examines how the Fourth Amendment applies to the real-time tracking of national security targets through technology. I argue that a non-physical, short-term, warrantless, real-time trace of an individual’s location for national security purposes will not infringe the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. As …

Cell Phone Searches In A Digital World: Blurred Lines, New Realities And Fourth Amendment Pluralism, Steven I. Friedland

Steven I. Friedland

State and federal courts are split over whether cell phone searches incident to a lawful arrest are permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court has the opportunity to create uniformity by accepting a certiorari petition in a cell phone search incident to arrest case, either United States v. Wurie or Riley v. California. The Court should do so to create an analysis that incorporates sensory enhancing technology, not avoids it, as it has done to date.

The split in case law evidences a central contradiction. Fourth Amendment rules need to be predictable and based on clear guidelines for effective …

Probable Cause On A Leash, Taylor D. Phipps

Taylor D Phipps

This article develops in four parts. Part II of this article explores the historical evolution of Supreme Court caselaw and the Court’s recent decision in Florida v. Harris.[1] This article attempts to enlighten the Court’s standard in Harris by looking to prior caselaw and discusses why courts should interpret the holding in a way that allows defendants to challenge the legitimacy and accuracy of training and certification programs. If applied incorrectly, Harris will violate the Fourth Amendment and allow searches to occur on less than probable cause. Part III reviews the fallibility of drug detection dogs and the diversity …

Contextual Expectations Of Privacy, Andrew Selbst

Andrew Selbst

Fourth Amendment search jurisprudence is nominally based on a “reasonable expectation of privacy,” but actual doctrine is detached from society’s conception of privacy. Courts rely on various binary distinctions: Is a piece of information secret or not? Was the observed conduct inside or outside? While often convenient, none of these binary distinctions can adequately capture the complicated range of ideas encompassed by “privacy.” Privacy theorists have begun to understand that a consideration of social context is essential to a full understanding of privacy. Helen Nissenbaum’s theory of contextual integrity, which characterizes a right to privacy as the preservation of expected …