4th Amendment

534 – Geofence Warrants

We all walk around with tracking devices on, cellphones. While these devices report our location on an almost second by second basis, what are the rules law enforcement has to follow to search that data?

524 – First Choice v. New Jersey

Contrary to what the Supreme Court believed in both the Roe and Dobbs decision, the question of abortion has not been settled in the United States. The case of First Choice v. New Jersey shows just how far some states will go to oppose the pro-life movement.

509 – Congressional Subpoenas

In a recent press release, the House Oversight Committee voted to advance two resolutions to hold “President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with duly issued subpoenas.” The question is, were those subpoenas lawful?

505 – Unreasonable Searches

When a government agency searches without a reason it’s called “fishing”. When the Attorney General of New Jersey issued a subpoena demanding the names, addresses, and phone numbers of the donors to a pregnancy center, it wasn’t just fishing, it was searching for a white whale.

499 – Warrantless Searches

We all know that, in general, the police need a warrant to enter your home. While the Fourth Amendment lays out the requirements for a warrant, there are exceptions to the warrant requirements. That’s because the Fourth Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches, not warrantless searches. The case Case v. Montana is about what makes police entry into a private home reasonable.

482 – Due Process Amendments

There has been a lot of talk about due process lately, but little of it seems to be informed by proof or evidence. Five of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights are called the “Due Process Amendments”. With a little bit of research, we can not only be sure of what due process is, but how the Constitution protects our rights to it.

479 – When the FBI Knocks

Imagine being awakened from a sound sleep by a group of armed men bashing in your door. Come to find out, it’s the FBI. Oh yeah, and they have the wrong house. After the trauma, not to mention the damage to your house, at the very least you can sue for a redress of these grievances, right? That is the question before the Supreme Court in the case Martin v. United States.

470 – Automatic License Plate Readers

There will always be tension between our desire for privacy and safety. We’re all for privacy, until we find that an invasion of said privacy could have stopped some terrible event. But are we willing to trade our privacy for safety?

“They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.”
— Benjamin Franklin

In the case of SCHOLL and BEDNARZ v. Illinois State Police the privacy question revolves around automatic license place readers (ALPRs) and what makes a search reasonable.