Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Antiracism In Action, Daniel Harawa, Brandon Hasbrouck

Washington and Lee Law Review

Racism pervades the criminal legal system, influencing everything from who police stop and search, to who prosecutors charge, to what punishments courts apply. The Supreme Court’s fixation on colorblind application of the Constitution gives judges license to disregard the role race plays in the criminal legal system, and all too often, they do. Yet Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory challenges the facially race-neutral reasoning of criminal justice actors, often applying ostensibly colorblind scrutiny to achieve a color-conscious jurisprudence. Nor is he afraid of engaging directly in a frank discussion of the racial realities of America, rebuking those within the system …

Frankly, It's A Mess: Requiring Courts To Transparently "Redline" Affidavits In The Face Of Franks Challenges, Diana Bibb

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I provides a brief overview of the Fourth Amendment, probable cause, and the exclusionary rule. Part II discusses Franks v. Delaware, the development of the challenge’s framework, and subsequent expansions to the doctrine made by the lower courts. Next, Part III argues that, despite the aforementioned expansions, courts have consistently weakened Franks. Notably, the Supreme Court refuses to consider Franks issues, including the multitude of splits over which standard of review is applicable. Moreover, some circuits have developed their own minute rules that have chiseled away at the effectiveness of a Franks challenge. Part IV proposes that …

Thompson V. Clark: Brief Of Amici Curiae Current And Former Prosecutors, Department Of Justice Officials, And Judges In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara L. Mcquade

Appellate Briefs

Amici are current and former federal, state, and local prosecutors, Department of Justice officials, and judges with experience prosecuting and establishing policy for prosecuting crimes at various levels of the criminal justice system. Amici recognize that prosecutors and judges must always conduct their duties in the interests of justice. Prosecutors therefore exercise their discretion to seek dismissal of criminal charges—and judges grant dismissal— where there is insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt or when other compelling circumstances call for dismissal. Amici have an interest in ensuring that prosecutors’ decisions whether to pursue criminal charges are not …

Border Searches For Investigatory Purposes: Implementing A Border Nexus Standard, Brenna Ferris

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

Border searches are a commonly used exception to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause and warrant requirements. Using a border search, the government can conduct searches of individuals without any kind of individualized suspicion. Border searches pose a concerning risk to privacy when they are used as a tool for criminal investigations. The Supreme Court has never ruled on searches used in this way, but lower courts are addressing the technique and reaching conflicting decisions. Courts need to take an approach that will protect the privacy interests of individuals while allowing the government to advance its interests in protecting its borders …

Visible Policing: Technology, Transparency, And Democratic Control, Hannah Bloch-Wehba

Faculty Scholarship

Law enforcement has an opacity problem. Police use sophisticated technologies to monitor individuals, surveil communities, and predict behaviors in increasingly intrusive ways. But legal institutions have struggled to understand—let alone set limits on—new investigative methods and techniques for two major reasons. First, new surveillance technology tends to operate in opaque and unaccountable ways, augmenting police power while remaining free of meaningful oversight. Second, shifts in Fourth Amendment doctrine have expanded law enforcement’s ability to engage in surveillance relatively free of scrutiny by courts or by the public. The result is that modern policing is not highly visible to oversight institutions …

(Re)Framing Race In Civil Rights Lawyering, Anthony V. Alfieri, Angela Onwuachi-Willig

Articles

This Review examines the significance of Henry Louis Gates, Jr.'s new book, Stony the Road: Reconstruction, White Supremacy, and the Rise of Jim Crow, for the study of racism in our nation's legal system and for the regulation of race in the legal profession, especially in the everyday labor of civil-rights and poverty lawyers, prosecutors, and public defenders. Surprisingly, few have explored the relevance of the racial narratives distilled by Gates in Stony the Roa - the images, stereotypes, and tropes that Whites constructed of Blacks to deepen and ensure the life and legacy of white supremacy-to the practice …

The Genetic Panopticon: Genetic Genealogy Searches And The Fourth Amendment, Genevieve Carter

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

As consumer DNA testing gains widespread popularity, so has law enforcement’s interest in leveraging genetic databases for criminal investigations. Consumer DNA testing products like 23andMe and Ancestry allow private individuals access to their genetic data on private databases. However, once coded, genetic data is free to be downloaded by users and uploaded to public databases. Police identify suspects by uploading cold case DNA to public genetic databases and find familial matches. If they identify a familial match, they narrow the field of suspects using traditional methods of investigation, which often includes extracting suspect DNA from a piece of their abandoned …

The Current State Of Students’ Fourth Amendment Rights: How Implicit Bias Goes Unchecked In A Subjective Framework, Christian Williams

Child and Family Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Comment: Doe V. Woodard And Its Impact On The Circuit Split Surrounding Social Workers’ Inspections Of Suspected Victims Of Child Abuse, Mary Kate Workman

Child and Family Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Fitbit Data And The Fourth Amendment: Why The Collection Of Data From A Fitbit Constitutes A Search And Should Require A Warrant In Light Of Carpenter V. United States, Alxis Rodis

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Fourth Amendment Stripped Bare: Substantiating Prisoners' Reasonable Right To Bodily Privacy, Meher Babbar

Northwestern University Law Review

Prisoners’ rights to bodily privacy under the Fourth Amendment are limited, allowing detention officials to strip-search them for contraband. The extent to which the Fourth Amendment protects prisoners, however, is uncertain. Questions regarding whether strip searches require reasonable suspicion and the manner in which officials may conduct strip searches have troubled courts for decades. In the absence of clear guidance from the Supreme Court, courts have reached inconsistent conclusions, imperiling the human rights and dignity of prisoners. This Note argues that courts should define and apply prisoners’ rights to bodily privacy with reference to international human-rights law, specifically the United …

Police Perceptions, Knowledge, And Performance: Traffic Stops And The Use Of K-9 Units, Christopher D. Totten, Gang Lee, Daniel Ozment

Catholic University Law Review

This empirical (survey) study of law enforcement officers aims to shed light on police conduct and knowledge concerning traffic stops, vehicle searches and the use of canine (K-9) units. This context is particularly relevant in light of a recent United States Supreme Court case in this area, Rodriguez v. United States, which held that when the mission of a routine traffic stop has been or reasonably should have been completed (i.e., the officer has issued a traffic ticket or a warning after having checked license, registration, insurance, and/ or warrants), the officer may not in general detain the vehicle …

Law Enforcement's Lochner, Miriam H. Baer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Bitcoin Searches And Preserving The Third-Party Doctrine, Christine A. Cortez

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

The Qualitative Fourth Amendment: The Case For A Refined, Information-Focused Approach To Fourth Amendment Cases Involving Non-Trespassatory Government Surveillance, Joshua L. Wagner

William & Mary Law Review

In his 2001 majority opinion for Kyllo v. United States, Justice Scalia adopted his characteristic chiding tone to gently reproach what he saw as a notably liberal departure from the original textual interpretation of the Constitution. The Katz test for Fourth Amendment violations, to Scalia, was plainly “circular, and hence subjective and unpredictable.” That it was one of the most influential and oft-discussed decisions the Supreme Court has ever handed down made little difference; regardless of whatever Justice Harlan and his successors had said, the Fourth Amendment was, at its heart, a protection against government interference with property and had …

Searches By Environmental Protection Agencies: When Is A Warrant Necessary?, David Sparks

Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law

No abstract provided.

Divided Court Issues Bright-Line Ruling On Fourth Amendment Seizures, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Cloudy With A Chance Of Government Intrusion: The Third-Party Doctrine In The 21st Century, Steven Arango

Catholic University Law Review

Technology may be created by humans, but we are dependent on it. Look around you: what technology is near you as you read this abstract? An iPhone? A laptop? Perhaps even an Amazon Echo. What do all these devices have in common? They store data in the cloud. And this data can contain some of our most sensitive information, such as business records or medical documents.

Even if you manage this cloud storage account, the government may be able to search your data without a warrant. Federal law provides little protection for cloud stored data. And the Fourth Amendment may …

Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States ("Supreme Court") will hear oral arguments in this matter on Tuesday, March 23, 2021. This case presents the narrow issue of whether a tribal police officer has the authority to investigate and detain a non-Indian on a public right-of-way within a reservation for a suspected violation of state or federal law. The lower courts, holding that tribes have no such authority, granted James Cooley’s motion to suppress evidence. The Supreme Court must decide whether the lower courts erred in so deciding. While the issue before the Supreme Court is itself narrow, it has …

The War On Drugs: Moral Panic And Excessive Sentences, Michael Vitiello

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States’ War on Drugs has not been pretty. Moral panic has repeatedly driven policy when states and the federal government have regulated drugs. Responding to that panic, legislators have authorized severe sentences for drug offenses.

By design, Article III gives federal judges independence, in part, to protect fundamental rights against mob rule. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has often failed to protect fundamental rights in times of moral panic. For example, it eroded Fourth Amendment protections during the War on Drugs. Similarly, it failed to protect drug offenders from excessive prison sentences during the War on Drugs. This Article …

Learning From The Past: Using Korematsu And Other Japanese Internment Cases To Provide Protections Against Immigration Detentions, Caleb Ward

Arkansas Law Review

One of the darkest periods in modern United States history is reoccurring with mixed public approval. During World War II, the United States government enacted executive orders creating a curfew, proscribing living areas, and forcing the exclusion and detention of all Japanese descendants from the West Coast. The United States justified these grievous freedom and equality violations through an increased need for national security “because we [were] at war with [Japan].” However, this perceived increased need for national security came from a fraudulent assessment showing any Japanese-American could be planning espionage or sabotage of the United States. After the war, …

Revising Reasonableness In The Cloud, Ian Walsh

Washington Law Review

Save everything—just in case––and search for it later. This is a modern mantra fueled by the ubiquity of smartphones, laptops, tablets, and free or low-cost data storage that leads users to store massive amounts of data in the cloud. But when users trust third-party cloud storage providers with private communications, they also surrender Fourth Amendment constitutional certainty. Existing statutory safeguards for these communications are lower than Fourth Amendment warrant and probable cause standards; this permits the government to seize large quantities of users’ private communications stored in the cloud with only minimal justification. Due to the revealing nature of such …

The Case For Replacing The Independent Intermediary Doctrine With Proximate Cause And Fourth Amendment Review In § 1983 Civil Rights Cases, Amanda Peters

Pepperdine Law Review

Plaintiffs who file claims under § 1983 of the Civil Rights Act encounter a strange blend of civil rights, tort, and criminal procedure laws. When civil rights plaintiffs sue officers and government agencies for violations of their Fourth Amendment rights, federal courts may cut off liability using qualified immunity, but they may also use a lesser-known defense of sorts called the independent intermediate doctrine. When courts permit officers to raise both qualified immunity and the doctrine, the two defensive theories provide officers something akin to absolute immunity. The doctrine treats judges, prosecutors, grand jurors, and fact finders as superseding agents …

Can I Have Some Privacy?: A Look Into The Unfortunate Truth Of Pregnancy Tests Throughout Sports And The Negative Impact On Female Athletes, Hannah Rogers

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal (1994 - )

No abstract provided.

Facial Recognition And The Fourth Amendment In The Wake Of Carpenter V. United States, Matthew Doktor

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Exclusionary Rule, And The Problem With Search And Seizure Law Under The Ohio Constitution, Corey Bushle

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Social Norms In Fourth Amendment Law, Matthew Tokson, Ari Ezra Waldman

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Courts often look to existing social norms to resolve difficult questions in Fourth Amendment law. In theory, these norms can provide an objective basis for courts’ constitutional decisions, grounding Fourth Amendment law in familiar societal attitudes and beliefs. In reality, however, social norms can shift rapidly, are constantly being contested, and frequently reflect outmoded and discriminatory concepts. This Article draws on contemporary sociological literatures on norms and technology to reveal how courts’ reliance on norms leads to several identifiable errors in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.

Courts assessing social norms generally adopt what we call the closure principle, or the idea that …

The Unconstitutional Police, Brandon Hasbrouck

Scholarly Articles

Most Fourth Amendment cases arise under a basic fact pattern. Police decide to do something--say, stop and frisk a suspect. They find some crime--say, a gun or drugs--they arrest the suspect, and the suspect is subsequently charged with a crime. The suspect--who is all too often Black--becomes a defendant and challenges the police officers' initial decision as unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. The defendant seeks to suppress the evidence against them or perhaps to recover damages for serious injuries under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The courts subsequently constitutionalize the police officers' initial decision with little or no scrutiny. Effectively, the …

The Power Of The Dissent And Writing The Future Of Justice: Maat, Aristotle's Rhetoric, And Justice Ginsburg's Dissent In Kentucky V. King, Livan Davidson

Intercultural Human Rights Law Review

This article explains why Ginsburg's dissent in King is rhetorically superior to the majority opinion. It evaluates, by way of comparing and contrasting, the persuasiveness of the dissent and majority opinions in King. This article examines the opinion through the lens of Aristotle's rhetorical model and the ancient tenet of Maat. It analyzes Ginsburg and Justice Alito's (Alito) use of rhetorical devices that appeal to persuasion, including logos (appeal to logic), ethos (appeal to credibility), pathos (appeal to emotions), and Maat (rightness in the world). This article concludes that Ginsburg's use of rhetoric has a superior appeal to fairness and …

Shotspotter – The New Tool To Degrade What Is Left Of The Fourth Amendment, 54 Uic L. Rev. 797 (2021), Benjamin Goodman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.