Latest in fourth amendment
The U.S. District Court in the District of Massachusetts held that searches of electronic devices at ports of entry require reasonable suspicion. The document is available here and below.
I recently posted a new draft article, “Implementing Carpenter,” on the Supreme Court's blockbuster June 2018 decision in Carpenter v. United States.
There has been a lot of buzz the past couple of days about claims by Kory Langhofer, counsel for Trump for America, that Robert Mueller's investigators wrongfully obtained copies of the presidential transition team's emails. One of the claims in Langhofer's letter is that the access violated the Fourth Amendment. I haven't seen a substantial legal analysis of this issue yet, so I thought I would try one.
As the Supreme Court begins its formal consideration of the Carpenter case, it seems useful to me to finally take up the challenge that my friend, Orin Kerr, has often laid down -- he asks why nobody is defending the mosaic theory? So let me do it in this (rather lenghty) post.
Orin Kerr, professor at George Washington University Law School, filed an amicus brief today in support of the respondent in Carpenter vs. U.S. The brief, which may be of interest to Lawfare readers, is available here:
The Internet of Things is a marvel. Cars, medical devices, homes, refrigerators—all of them now come with silicon chips and data collection, analysis and sharing capabilities. For the most part the enhancements in efficiency, connectivity and cost-reduction make the use of IoT a no-brainer. But lurking in the background are a host of unaddressed issues of cybersecurity, civil liberties, transparency, accountability, and privacy. Today's story of the Tell-Tale Heart lies at the intersection of technology, privacy and criminal law.
On Friday, Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ordered Google to comply with search warrants for emails stored overseas.
Recent news reports indicate that the FBI has obtained a warrant to search a cache of emails belonging to Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin. The emails were discovered in the course of an “unrelated case” involving Abedin’s now-estranged husband, Anthony Weiner, who is under investigation for allegedly sexting with an underage girl.
Does the FISA court perform a recognizably judicial function when it reviews 702 minimization procedures for compliance with the Fourth amendment? Our guest for episode 115 is Orin Kerr, GWU professor and all-round computer crime guru.
While we are at it, I thought I would also call attention to this provision of the Omnibus. It appears in the section which funds the financial services agencies (that is, it applies to the IRS, SEC, FTC, GSA, and OMB):