Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Ad coelum principle (1)
- Adversarial warrant proceedings (1)
- Aerial intrusion (1)
- Aerial surveillance (1)
- Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (1)
-
- Facial recognition technology (FRT) (1)
- Illegal search and seizure (1)
- Jones intrusion test (1)
- Jones v. United States (1)
- Katz v. United States (1)
- Law of free expression (1)
- Law of privacy (1)
- New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1)
- Originalism (1)
- Reasonable expectation of privacy (1)
- Roberts court (1)
- Roe v. Wade reversal (1)
- Stare decisis (1)
- Warrant requirement (1)
- Warrants Counsel (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Privacy Law
Aerial Trespass And The Fourth Amendment, Randall F. Khalil
Aerial Trespass And The Fourth Amendment, Randall F. Khalil
Michigan Law Review
Since 1973, courts have analyzed aerial surveillance under the Fourth Amendment by applying the test from Katz v. United States, which states that a search triggers the Fourth Amendment when a government actor violates a person’s “reasonable expectation of privacy.” The Supreme Court applied Katz to aerial surveillance three times throughout the 1980s, yet this area of the law remains unsettled and outcomes are unpredictable. In 2012, the Supreme Court recognized an alternative to the Katz test in Jones v. United States, which held that a search triggers the Fourth Amendment when a government actor physically intrudes into …
Giving The Fourth Amendment Meaning: Creating An Adversarial Warrant Proceeding To Protect From Unreasonable Searches And Seizures, Ben Mordechai-Strongin
Giving The Fourth Amendment Meaning: Creating An Adversarial Warrant Proceeding To Protect From Unreasonable Searches And Seizures, Ben Mordechai-Strongin
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
For at least the past 40 years, police and prosecutors have had free reign in conducting illegal searches and seizures nominally barred by the Fourth Amendment. The breadth of exceptions to the warrant requirement, the lax interpretation of probable cause, and especially the “good faith” doctrine announced in U.S. v. Leon have led to severe violations of privacy rights, trauma to those wrongly searched or seized, and a court system overburdened by police misconduct cases. Most scholars analyzing the issue agree that the rights guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment—to be free from unreasonable search and seizure—have been severely eroded or …
Unprecedented Precedent And Original Originalism: How The Supreme Court’S Decision In Dobbs Threatens Privacy And Free Speech Rights, Leonard Niehoff
Unprecedented Precedent And Original Originalism: How The Supreme Court’S Decision In Dobbs Threatens Privacy And Free Speech Rights, Leonard Niehoff
Articles
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has drawn considerable attention because of its reversal of Roe v. Wade and its rejection of a woman’s constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy. The Dobbs majority, and some of the concurring opinions, emphasized that the ruling was a narrow one. Nevertheless, there are reasons to think the influence of Dobbs may extend far beyond the specific constitutional issue the case addresses.
This article explains why Dobbs could have significant and unanticipated implications for the law of privacy and the law of free expression. I argue that two …