Can a fingerprint alone provide “testimony” about a person? Earlier this month, a federal court in California said yes. But the court was not engaging in a highly-localized form of palm-reading; rather, the question arose in the ever-evolving field of how to balance law enforcement needs and individual citizens’ privacy interests as new technologies emerge.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California has been a hotspot for privacy-related litigation,… More
In a recent decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, Martin Boroiang v. Robert S. Mueller, III, et al., No. 09-1630, the First Circuit rejected a challenge to the requirement that a blood sample be given by a federal offender for purposes of creating a DNA profile and entering it into a centralized government database.
The DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (“DNA Act”) applies to individuals who have been convicted of a “qualifying federal offense”… More
Earlier this year, the Wisconsin and New York state courts split on whether police may install a covert GPS tracking device on a suspect’s car without a warrant. On September 17, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed the GPS tracking device issue, ruling that Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights requires a warrant before such a device may be installed and used.
The defendant,… More
From the increasingly populated intersection of the Fourth Amendment and modern technology, comes this story from Wired’s "Threat Level." The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) claims the right enter onto any property to inspect — without a warrant — any radio equipment, regardless of whether it is licensed or unlicensed. In an interview with Wired, an FCC spokesperson claimed that the FCC’s right to inspect radio equipment extends to “anything using RF energy.” … More
According to the Chicago Tribune, on May 7, 2009, a three-judge panel of Wisconsin Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that police "can attach GPS to cars to secretly track anybody’s movements without obtaining search warrants" without violating the Fourth Amendment. The court’s opinion in State v. Sveum can be found here. The defendant Sveum was under investigation for stalking when the police obtained a warrant to secretly place a GPS device on his car while it was parked in the his driveway. … More
Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Safford Unified School v. Redding, a dispute concerning the propriety of a school-ordered a strip-search of a 13-year-old student who was believed to be in possession of prescription strength ibuprofen in violation of the school’s zero-tolerance drug policy. The case has received a good deal of media coverage (see the New York Times article for an example) because the facts are attention grabbing. … More
On Monday the Department of Justice released a previously classified opinion entitled “Authority for Use of Military Force To Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States” (.pdf), which concluded, among other things, that “the Fourth Amendment [of the U.S. Constitution] does not apply to domestic military operations designed to deter and prevent further terrorist attacks.” This may come as a shock to some because the Fourth Amendment expressly prohibits the government from searching or seizing individuals or their property absent a warrant and probable cause,… More