Add to ORKGThe U.S. Supreme Court has struggled over the years to develop the concept of what constitutes a reasonable zone of privacy when it comes to intrusion on an individual\u27s physical space or activities. With the advent and widespread adoption of new technologies such as drones and listening devices, concern for protecting privacy has magnified, yet court doctrine remains inconsistent. The author, Washington State\u27s Chief Privacy Officer, reviews the history of Supreme Court search and seizure rulings in prominent cases to identify both patterns and flaws on the topic of protecting citizen privacy
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In ...
This Article reports an attempt to investigate empirically important aspects of the Fourth Amendment...
In this essay, Professor Solove argues that the Fourth Amendment reasonable expectation of privacy t...
The Fourth Amendment protects people’s reasonable expectations of privacy when there is an actual, s...
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibits unreasonable searches and se...
Technology has always presented itself as a problem for the court system. As the pace of technologic...
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom from government intrusion into indi...
The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable “searches and seizures,” but in the digital age o...
Recent developments in technology, Supreme Court case law, and state legislation have created a conu...
A recent, illustrated version of the United States Constitution,issued in commemoration of its bicen...
Society has long struggled with the meaning of privacy in a modern world. This struggle is not new. ...
Part I of this Article discusses the facts in People v. Weaver, the majority and dissenting opinions...
Technology has transformed government surveillance and opened traditionally private information to o...
In 2013, the Supreme Court tacitly conceded that the expectations-of-privacy test used since 1967 to...
Supreme Court doctrine protects two seemingly distinct kinds of interests under the heading of priva...
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In ...
This Article reports an attempt to investigate empirically important aspects of the Fourth Amendment...
In this essay, Professor Solove argues that the Fourth Amendment reasonable expectation of privacy t...
The Fourth Amendment protects people’s reasonable expectations of privacy when there is an actual, s...
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibits unreasonable searches and se...
Technology has always presented itself as a problem for the court system. As the pace of technologic...
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom from government intrusion into indi...
The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable “searches and seizures,” but in the digital age o...
Recent developments in technology, Supreme Court case law, and state legislation have created a conu...
A recent, illustrated version of the United States Constitution,issued in commemoration of its bicen...
Society has long struggled with the meaning of privacy in a modern world. This struggle is not new. ...
Part I of this Article discusses the facts in People v. Weaver, the majority and dissenting opinions...
Technology has transformed government surveillance and opened traditionally private information to o...
In 2013, the Supreme Court tacitly conceded that the expectations-of-privacy test used since 1967 to...
Supreme Court doctrine protects two seemingly distinct kinds of interests under the heading of priva...
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In ...
This Article reports an attempt to investigate empirically important aspects of the Fourth Amendment...
In this essay, Professor Solove argues that the Fourth Amendment reasonable expectation of privacy t...