Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Social-Network Theory And The Diffusion Of The Search-And-Seizure Exclusionary Rule Among State Courts Between Weeks And Wolf, Laurence A. Benner, Robert Bird, Donald J. Smythe

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Revisiting "Special Needs" Theory Via Airport Searches, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

Controversy has raged since the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) introduced Advanced Imaging Technology, capable of producing detailed images of travelers' bodies, and "enhanced" pat frisks as part of everyday airport travel. In the face of challenges in the courts and in public discourse, the TSA has justified the heightened security measures as a necessary means to prevent terrorist attacks. The purpose of this Essay is to situate the Fourth Amendment implications of the new regime within a broader historical context. Most germane, after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) introduced sweeping new screening of air travelers in the 1960s and 1970s …

Making The Most Of United States V. Jones In A Surveillance Society: A Statutory Implementation Of Mosaic Theory, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Jones, a majority of the Justices appeared to recognize that under some circumstances aggregation of information about an individual through governmental surveillance can amount to a Fourth Amendment search. If adopted by the Court, this notion sometimes called "mosaic theory"-could bring about a radical change to Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, not just in connection with surveillance of public movements-the issue raised in Jonesbut also with respect to the government's increasingly pervasive record-mining efforts. One reason the Court might avoid the mosaic theory is the perceived difficulty of implementing it. This article …

Unintentional Levels Of Force In §1983 Excessive Force Claims, Nathan R. Pittman

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brady, Trust, And Error, Samuel R. Wiseman

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Katz Cradle: Holding On To Fourth Amendment Parity In An Age Of Evolving Electronic Communication, Christopher R. Brennan

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Making Rights, Nancy Leong

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

By adjudicating cases, courts make constitutional rights. This Article considers the conditions under which this constitutional rights-making should take place. Ideally, constitutional rights-making should occur simultaneously in multiple remedial, factual, and procedural contexts; in reality, however, rights are undesirably confined to a single context. This situation has negative consequences for the endeavor of constitutional rights-making.

As a case study in rights-making, the Article offers a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis of the Fourth Amendment. It presents an original data set cataloging every instance of Fourth Amendment rights-making in the federal appellate courts from 2005 and 2009. That data set shows …

An "Objectively Reasonable" Criticism Of The Doctrine Of Qualified Immunity In Excessive Force Cases Brought Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Philip Sheng

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Public Education And Student Privacy: Application Of The Fourth Amendment To Dormitories At Public Colleges And Universities, Bryan R. Lemons

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Wiretapping The Internet: The Expansion Of The Communications Assistance To Law Enforcement Act To Extend Government Surveillance, Christa M. Hibbard

Federal Communications Law Journal

Criminal use of the Internet to circumvent traditional government phone wiretaps has inspired the Obama Administration to create a proposal to expand the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act ("CALEA"). CALEA was passed in 1994 to regulate telephone and broadband companies to ensure compliance with standards to enable government wiretapping. The proposed amendment of CALEA would allow the government to require all communications service providers to meet technical standards necessary to comply with a wiretap order. The expansion of CALEA would likely widen its scope to social networking sites, instant messaging, gaming consoles that allow conversation among multiple players, and …

Davis And The Good Faith Exception: Pushing Exclusion To Extinction?, Eleanor De Golian

Mercer Law Review

To mitigate the effects of unlawful searches and remain faithful to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the United States Supreme Court created the exclusionary rule, which requires lower courts to suppress evidence obtained from illegal searches. The Court, however, has recognized exceptions to the exclusionary rule, many of which involve police officers' "good faith" reliance on what they believe to be legal authority to search. In Davis v. United States, the Supreme Court held that, where a police officer relies on binding precedent in performing a search, the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule will not be used …

Can Social Science Defeat A Legal Fiction? Challenging Unlawful Stops Under The Fourth Amendment, Josephine Ross

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Contemporary Silver Platter Doctrine, David C. Gray, Meagan Cooper, David Mcaloon

Faculty Scholarship

In a line of cases beginning with United States v. Calandra, the Court has created a series of exceptions to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule that permit illegally seized evidence to be admitted in litigation forums collateral to criminal trials. This “collateral use” exception allows the government to profit from Fourth Amendment violations in grand jury investigations, civil tax suits, habeas proceedings, immigration removal procedures, and parole revocation hearings. In this essay we argue that these collateral use exceptions raise serious conceptual and practical concerns. The core of our critique is that the collateral use exception reconstitutes a version of …

One More Good Reason For In-Car Videotaping Of Traffic Stops: An Accurate Assessment Of "Consent", Robert L. White

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

There are a number of reasons why legislative reform mandating the use of in-car cameras in police cruisers would benefit the criminal justice system in Illinois. In-car cameras provide evidence for cases involving traffic violations or intoxicated motorists. They produce instantly available training materials. They also assist victims of police misconduct, as well as officers defending themselves against misconduct claims. This Comment looks to add to this list of benefits the role in-car cameras can play in assessing the validity of consents to search that officers obtain during traffic stops.

Indecent Exposure: Do Warrantless Searches Of Cell Phones Violate The Fourth Amendment?, Amy Vorenberg

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article argues that searches of student’s cell phone should require a warrant in most circumstances. The amount and personal nature of information on a smart phone warrants special Fourth Amendment protection. This issue is particularly relevant in the public school setting where administrators routinely confiscate phones from students caught using them in school. With more frequency, administrators are looking at the phones, scrolling through text messages and photos, and on some occasions, responding to text messages.

The U.S. Supreme Court in Safford v. Redding, acknowledges the special considerations that school children should be afforded in part because of the …

The Fourth Amendment, Ethan Payne

A with Honors Projects

This projects explains the fourth amendment using skits and a PowerPoint presentation.

The Latest 4th Amendment Privacy Conundrum: "Stingrays", Max Bulinksi

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

Wired is reporting renewed hubbub regarding statutory and Fourth Amendment protections of individuals’ privacy in the digital age. This time, it comes in the form of federal officers using a fake cellphone tower (called a “stingray”) to locate their suspect, Mr. Rigmaiden, by tracking the location of his cellphone. According to an affidavit submitted to the court, the stingray only captures the equivalent of header information – such as the phone or account number assigned to the aircard as well as dialing, routing and address information involved in the communication.

Setting Us Up For Disaster: The Supreme Court's Decision In Terry V. Ohio, Thomas B. Mcaffee

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Post-Racialism And Searches Incident To Arrest, Frank Rudy Cooper

Scholarly Works

For 28 years the Court held that an officer's search incident to arrest powers automatically extended to the entire passenger compartment of a vehicle. In 2009, however, the Arizona v. Gant decision held that officers do not get to search a vehicle incident to arrest unless they satisfy (1) the Chimel v. California Court's requirement that the suspect has access to weapons or evanescent evidence therein or (2) the United States v. Rabinowitz Court's requirement that the officer reasonably believe evidence of the crime of arrest will be found therein. While many scholars read Gant as a triumph for civil …

Anonymous Tips Alleging Drunk Driving: Why "One Free Swerve" Is One Too Many, James Michael Scears

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.