The Question Presented: Does the Fourth Amendment permit the government to track and monitor citizens’ Internet browsing activity without a warrant?
- The link to the Amici Curiae Brief.
- Brief from the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
- Table of Authorities (same order as in brief)
- Cases
- Carpenter v. United States (2018) – oyez brief
- Does the warrantless search and seizure of cell phone records, which include the location and movements of cell phone users, violate the Fourth Amendment?
- 5-4 Majority that it was a violation of 4th to search location data of 3rd party.
- Dissent show crime control conservative originalist perspective. – see Justia case.
- City of Ontario v. Quon (2010) – oyez brief
- search of a police text account by the department w/o warrant and w/o text policy.
- reasonable expectation of privacy 42 USC 1983 lawsuit by police against department.
- not a violation of the 4th. – see Justia case
- Hoffa v. United States (1967) – oyez brief
- Bribes. – see Justia case
- In re Application of United States for an Order Authorizing Use of a Pen Register & Trap, 396 F. Supp. 2d 45 (D. Mass. 2005) – court listener entire case
- Problems specific to the installation of pen register/trap & trace devices when installed on internet service accounts as opposed to when they are installed on telephones.
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) – oyez brief
- Does the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures require the police to obtain a search warrant in order to wiretap a public pay phone?
- Yes. – see Justia case
- Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001) – oyez brief
- Does the use of a thermal-imaging device to detect relative amounts of heat emanating from a private home constitute an unconstitutional search in violation of the Fourth Amendment?
- Yes. – see Justia case
- Lopez v. United States, 373 U.S. 427 (1963) – oyez brief
- (1) Did the IRS agent’s actions toward the petitioner constitute entrapment?
- (2) Was the use of the wire recording of a conversation between the petitioner and the IRS agent as evidence a violation of the Fourth Amendment?
- No. – see Justia case
- Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435 (2013) – oyez brief
- Does the Fourth Amendment allow states to collect and analyze DNA from people arrested, but not convicted, of serious crimes?
- Yes. 5-4 Majority. – see Justia case
- Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 (1998) – oyez brief
- In accordance with the Fourth Amendment, do household visitors have the same protection against unreasonable searches and seizures as do residents or overnight social guests?
- No. – see Justia case
- Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S. Ct. 1730 (2017) – oyez brief
- Does a North Carolina law prohibiting registered sex offenders from accessing various websites, where minors are known to be active and have accounts, regardless of whether or not the sex offender directly interacted with a minor, violate the First Amendment?
- Yes it violates the 1st Amendment. 5-3 Majority. – see Justia case
- Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (2014) – oyez brief
- Was the evidence admitted at trial from Riley’s cell phone discovered through a search that violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches?
- Yes. Unanimous Decision. – see Justia case
- Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) – oyez brief
- Did the use of a pen register without a warrant violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures?
- No. 5-3 Majority. – see Justia case
- United States v. Christie, 624 F.3d 558 (3d Cir. 2010) – court listener entire case
- United States v. Forrester, 512 F.3d 500 (9th Cir. 2008) – court listener entire case
- United States v. Fregoso, 60 F.3d 1314 (8th Cir. 1995) – case text
- United States v. Hallmark, 911 F.2d 399 (10th Cir. 1990) – court listener appeals
- United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109 (1984) – oyez brief
- Does the Fourth Amendment prohibit the warrantless testing of the suspicious powder?
- No. 7-2 Majority. see Justia case
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012) – oyez brief
- Did the warrantless use of a tracking device on Jones’s vehicle to monitor its movements on public streets violate Jones’ Fourth Amendment rights?
- Yes. Unanimous Decision. – see Justia case
- United States v. Perrine, 518 F.3d 1196 (10th Cir. 2008) – court listener entire case
- digital child porn. on appeals, lower court decision affirmed.
- Perrine appeals, arguing (1) the district court erred in failing to suppress evidence obtained against him in violation of the Fourth Amendment and/or 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) and 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5743(d); and (2) the district court erred in failing to dismiss the case against Perrine due to outrageous government conduct.
- United States v. Ulbricht, 858 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2017) – case text
- United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745 (1971) – oyez brief
- Does the 4th Amendment bar from evidence the testimony of government agents relating certain conversations that occurred between a defendant and an undercover government informant, which the agents overheard while monitoring the frequency of a radio transmitter concealed on the body of that informant?
- No. 5-4 Plurality. – see Justia case
- Walter v. United States, 447 U.S. 649 (1980) – oyez brief
- Is the warrantless projection of films a violation of the Fourth Amendment?
- Yes. 5-4 Majority. – see Justia case
- Carpenter v. United States (2018) – oyez brief
- Statutes
- Cases
- other blogs etc about the case.
- United States v. Ulbricht, 858 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2017) – case text
- U.S. v. Ulbricht – Appeal – Justia.
- Ulbricht v. United States – Scotus Blog.
- The Cato Institute was one of the Amici.
- An interesting article by oyez – “Shifting Scales – How the Roberts Court is Interpreting the 4th Amendment.”