Reasonable Expectations of Privacy for Youth in a Digital Age (original) (raw)
Related papers
FAILING EXPECTATIONS: FOURTH AMENDMENT DOCTRINE IN THE ERA OF TOTAL SURVEILLANCE
Today’s reasonable expectation test and the third-party doctrine have little to nothing to offer by way of privacy protection if users today are at least conflicted about whether transactional noncontent data should be shared with third parties, including law enforcement officials. This uncertainty about how to define public expectation as a descriptive matter has compelled courts to defer to legislatures to find out what public expectation ought to be more as a matter of prudence than doctrine. Courts and others presume that legislatures are far better than courts at defining public expectations about emergent technologies. This Essay argues that the reasonable expectation standard is particularly flawed if it has the effect of encouraging judges to seek guidance from legislatures on constitutional norms and principles. Judicial review is the vital antimajoritarian check against excessive government intrusions on individual liberty under our constitutional scheme. This is a responsibility that courts cannot pass off to the political branches when, as is the case today, most people expect that the cost of network connection is total surveillance. It is beyond irony that, today, courts consult public expectation to determine private entitlements. This Essays argues that court-administered privacy law doctrine must change if the protection against “unreasonable searches and seizures” is to have any positive legal meaning. The current court-created doctrine will not be able to keep up if it compels judges to measure public expectation. It is time for courts to reassert their positive duty to say what privacy law is.
2012
Privacy in cyberspace is becoming a dispute issue for the criminal justice system. Initially, we should determine what kind of cyberspace we desire, and then, we can choose a legal platform to get this online environment. Because policing in cyberspace is an inevitable need, the question of what extent the law can protect individuals’ expectation of privacy in cyberspace has become an important problem. This study initially explains the legal descriptions of privacy, expectation of privacy, and cyberspace. Then, it discusses the expectation of privacy in cyberspace based on the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. It also presents the current state of the privacy of private life and the privacy of communication in the Turkish judicial system.
Fourth Amendment Judicial Understanding
Brandeis University Law Journal
This article explores the Fourth Amendment’s privacy protections specifically focused on the “third party exception” and the integrity of that exception to the Fourth Amendment and its definitions of privacy. Additionally, this article examines the European Union’s relatively new data privacy law as an alternative way to account for third parties while remaining faithful to the Fourth Amendment’s privacy ideals.
2014
This paper considers the Fourth Amendment issues surrounding warrantless surveillance by law enforcement using cell phone data to track the location of suspects and the potential application of the Supreme Court's 2012 decision in United States v. Jones to this behavior. The paper provides an overview of the Court's historic privacy jurisprudence from Olmstead v. United States to Katz v. United States and of the recent decisions in Jones and Florida v. Jardines. A dataset of federal and state cases in which the use of cell phones to track suspects was at issue was constructed and analyzed. At this point in time, there is no clear legal standard by which the courts can provide oversight over law enforcement in this growing area of police practice. It is suggested that the application of Justice Scalia's trespass standard will only make the problem worse and the probable cause standard adopted in five states could easily be applied to all jurisdictions without limiting pol...