All in Privacy
In his initial brief to the Supreme Court, Carpenter argues that law enforcement agents may not acquire CSLI records covering a “longer-term” period of time unless they first obtain a Fourth Amendment search warrant. Part three in the Carpenter series looks at why the mosaic theory of the Fourth Amendment is a central issue in the case.
One of the most important Fourth Amendment cases in years is being considered by the Supreme Court during its October 2017 term. The case, Carpenter v. United States, concerns whether historical cell site location information should be protected under the Fourth Amendment, requiring law enforcement to first obtain a search warrant before requiring wireless service providers to hand over CSLI related to a subscriber.
The Petitioner’s initial brief in Carpenter v. U.S. has been filed with the Supreme Court. The appeal presents the following question for the Court: Whether the warrantless seizure and search of historical cell phone records revealing the location and movements of a cell phone user over the course of 127 days is permitted by the Fourth Amendment.
Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), along with six other co-sponsors have introduced the Email Privacy Act of 2017, which would amend the Electronic Communications Privacy Act by requiring law enforcement agents to obtain a warrant before acquiring the content of electronic messages.
As part of an investigation of a possible murder, police detectives sought to obtain data from an Amazon Echo device. The case presents an excellent backdrop for examining legal issues that are arise out of the pervasive use of smart devices, the growing trend to connect everything to the Internet, and the massive amounts of data collected by Internet-connected devices.