Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Trust: A Model For Disclosure In Patent Law, Ari Ezra Waldman

Indiana Law Journal

How to draw the line between public and private is a foundational, first-principles question of privacy law, but the answer has implications for intellectual property, as well. This project is one in a series of papers about first-person disclosures of information in the privacy and intellectual property law contexts, and it defines the boundary between public and nonpublic information through the lens of social science —namely, principles of trust.

Patent law’s public use bar confronts the question of whether legal protection should extend to information previously disclosed to a small group of people. I present evidence that shows that current …

A Tactical Fourth Amendment, Brandon L. Garrett, Seth W. Stoughton

Faculty Publications

What rules regulate when police can kill? As ongoing public controversy over high-profile police killings drives home, the civil, criminal, and administrative rules governing police use of force all remain deeply contested. Members of the public may assume that police rules and procedures provide detailed direction for when officers can use deadly force. However, many agencies train officers to respond to threats according to a force “continuum” that does not provide hardedged rules for when or how police can use force or deadly force. Nor, as recent cases have illustrated, does a criminal prosecution under state law readily lend itself …

The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo

Fordham Law Review

This Note explores the CSLI debate by analyzing the circuit courts’ decisions, scholars’ disagreement with those decisions, and the alternative approaches offered to protect and evaluate CSLI records. This Note concludes that warrantless CSLI monitoring should be analyzed under the “mosaic theory” of the Fourth Amendment. In support, it argues that this theory best addresses the concerns with CSLI tracking and proposes a standard that courts may use to apply it.

The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo

Fordham Law Review

This Note explores the CSLI debate by analyzing the circuit courts’ decisions, scholars’ disagreement with those decisions, and the alternative approaches offered to protect and evaluate CSLI records. This Note concludes that warrantless CSLI monitoring should be analyzed under the “mosaic theory” of the Fourth Amendment. In support, it argues that this theory best addresses the concerns with CSLI tracking and proposes a standard that courts may use to apply it.

I Am Not Law Enforcement! Why The Special Needs Exception To The Fourth Amendment Should Apply To Caseworkers Investigating Allegations Of Child Abuse, Lauren Kobrick

Cardozo Law Review

The note examines the application of the Fourth Amendment's special needs doctrine in child abuse investigations, advocating for the adoption of a primary purpose test to determine the doctrine's applicability. It critiques the inconsistent approaches across circuits and proposes this test to clarify when warrantless searches and seizures by caseworkers are constitutional, ensuring a balance between child protection and Fourth Amendment protections.

Upholding Citizens’ Privacy In The Use Of Stingray Technology: Is New York Behind?, Samantha Hazen

Pace Law Review

This Comment will argue that New York should follow the federal agencies’ and states’ leads by imposing a warrant requirement supported by probable cause on local and state agencies that wish to use Stingray technology in their investigations. The first section will explore Stingray technology and how it works. The second section will frame the issue and describe New York’s current standard. The third section will discuss the judicial response to the issue and how New York courts seem to place the burden of upholding privacy on the citizen, instead of the government. The third section will also discuss a …

Civil Liberty Or National Security: The Battle Over Iphone Encryption, Karen Lowell

Georgia State University Law Review

On June 5, 2013, Edward Snowden released what would be the first of many documents exposing the vast breadth of electronic surveillance the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National Security Agency (NSA) had been conducting on millions of United States citizens. Although the federal agencies had legal authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to collect metadata from companies such as Verizon, many Americans considered this data collection to be a massive invasion of privacy.

Equipped with the knowledge of sweeping domestic surveillance programs, citizens and technology firms fighting for strong privacy and security protection, have started …

Domestic Drone Surveillance: The Court’S Epistemic Challengeand Wittgenstein’S Actional Certainty, Robert Greenleaf Brice, Katrina L. Sifferd

Louisiana Law Review

The article focuses on the domestic drone surveillance in the U.S. and mentions U.S. Fourth Amendment and the different legal standards of proof that might apply to law enforcement for the use of drones; and role of U.S. Supreme Court in determining epistemic challenge of privacy.

Pricing The Fourth Amendment, Miriam Baer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Searching For The Appropriate Standard: Stops, Seizure, And The Reasonable Person's Willingness To Walk Away From The Police, Desiree Phair

Washington Law Review

A person is “seized” by an officer, and thus entitled to Fourth Amendment protections, if a reasonable person would not feel free to leave. Although courts must set a standard for when a person has been seized by an officer, few real-world studies exist regarding when individuals feel truly free to disregard the police. In addition, gathering new data poses challenges. This Comment presents newly produced data sets and then explores adjustments to the current reasonable person standard, arguing the advantages of focusing on officer actions as opposed to the current focus on whether a defendant feels “free to leave.” …

Game Of Phones: The Fourth Amendment Implications Of Real-Time Cell Phone Tracking, Cal Cumpstone

Cleveland State Law Review

With the help of technological advancements, law enforcement can now hijack a targeted individual’s cell phone to ping and track the phone’s exact location in real time. Based upon previous rulings, this new tracking process has apparently fallen into a "grey area" of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. However, real-time cell phone tracking should be a search in terms of the Fourth Amendment and, therefore, require a warrant. Real-time cell phone tracking infringes on an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy, violates the trespass doctrine as a trespass to chattels, and violates the Kyllo standard by using technology not in general public use …

Preventing An Air Panopticon: A Proposal For Reasonable Legal Restrictions On Aerial Surveillance, Jake Laperruque

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Digital Technology And Analog Law: Cellular Location Data, The Third-Party Doctrine, And The Law's Need To Evolve, Justin Hill

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pricing The Fourth Amendment, Miriam H. Baer

William & Mary Law Review

Critics have long decried the Fourth Amendment’s lack of an adequate remedy to secure its compliance. Neither the exclusionary rule nor the threat of civil liability deters police misconduct, leaving scholars to cast about for alternative measures. The emphasis on penalties, however, overlooks a different problem: detection. Because of policing’s fast-paced nature, even so-called “flagrant” Fourth Amendment violations trigger insufficient liability due to low probabilities of detection.

This Article addresses this problem by drawing on the Pigouvian tax literature. The Pigouvian tax—sometimes referred to as a “corrective tax”—is a pricing instrument imposed by regulators in an amount equal to the …

Do Foreign Nationals Really Have Constitutional Rights?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Last month, President Trump issued an executive order that has become known as the "travel ban." Among other things, the ban sought to temporarily exclude from the United States foreign nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries.

Almost immediately, a number of plaintiffs sued and succeeded in obtaining "stays" preventing the ban from going into effect until the cases can be tried. Courts granted these stays because they found that the ban was likely to violate, among other things, anti-discrimination principles embedded within the First and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

What Is The Scope Of Searches Of Cell Phones Incident To Arrest? United States V. Wurie And The Return Of Chimel, Benjamin J. Wahrer

Maine Law Review

Americans can potentially be arrested for hundreds of nonviolent, minor offenses In fact in 2012, nearly 1 out of every 25 Americans was arrested. Alarmingly, this figure is even higher among youths, with 1 out of every 3 expected to be arrested at least once by the time they turn 23. Once played under arrest, an individual’s expectation of privacy is severely reduced and law enforcement personnel traditionally have broad authority to search and seize anything found on the arrestee’s person, no matter the nature of the arresting crime. For example, it is well-settled law that the arresting officer may …

Local Law Enforcement Jumps On The Big Data Bandwagon: Automated License Plate Recognition Systems, Infomation Privacy, And Access To Government Information, Bryce Clayton Newell

Maine Law Review

As government agencies and law enforcement departments increasingly adopt big-data surveillance technologies as part of their routine investigatory practice, personal information privacy concerns are becoming progressively more palpable. On the other hand, advancing technologies and data-mining potentially offer law enforcement greater ability to detect, investigate, and prosecute criminal activity. These concerns (for personal information privacy and the efficacy of law enforcement) are both very important in contemporary society. On one view, American privacy law has not kept up with advancing technological capabilities, and government agencies have arguably begun to overstep the acceptable boundaries of information access, violating the privacy of …

Reason And Reasonableness: The Necessary Diversity Of The Common Law, Frederic G. Sourgens

Maine Law Review

This Article addresses the central concept of “reasonableness” in the common law and constitutional jurisprudence. On the basis of three examples, the common law of torts, the common law of contracts, and Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, the Article notes that different areas of the law follow fundamentally inconsistent utilitarian, pragmatic, and formalist reasonableness paradigms. The significance of this diversity of reasonableness paradigms remains largely under-theorized. This Article submits that the diversity of reasonableness paradigms is a necessary feature of the common law. It theorizes that the utilitarian, pragmatic and formalistic paradigms are structural elements driving the common law norm-generation process. This …

Knock And Talk No More, Jamesa J. Drake

Maine Law Review

The Supreme Court has set out a roadmap for challenging one of the most common and insidious police tactics used today: the knock-and-talk. The path is short and clear and it leads to the inescapable conclusion that the knock-and-talk—as it is actually employed in practice—is unconstitutional. Although the Court has yet to squarely consider the issue, some Justices have already taken pains to say, in dictum, that knock-and-talks are lawful. Practitioners should not be dissuaded. What this faction of the Court describes is a highly romanticized—and utterly inaccurate—conception of what a knock-and-talk actually entails. The sort of activity that these …

Riley And Abandonment: Expanding Fourth Amendment Protection Of Cell Phones, Abigail Hoverman

Northwestern University Law Review

In light of the privacy concerns inherent to personal technological devices, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in 2014 recognizing the need for categorical heightened protection of cell phones during searches incident to arrest in Riley v. California. This Note argues for expansion of heightened protections for cell phones in the context of abandoned evidence because the same privacy concerns apply. This argument matters because state and federal courts have not provided the needed protection to abandoned cell phones pre- or post-Riley.