The most difficult problem that arises for the courts because of technology is the codification of the Fourth Amendment to apply to technological change and progress. The vast changes technology brings to surveillance, security, and data collection offer a challenge to courts in classifying these new technologies and monitoring their use within the limits of the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment states that people have the right to be “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” An influential dissent written by Louis Brandeis contends that the amendment does not simply protect a person’s property but the “right to be let alone.” Though, current Fourth Amendment law echoes Brandeis’s opinion, courts run into new problems of interpretation as new technology is developed. Courts are forced to utilize cumbersome metaphors in order to make laws based on a constitutional amendment that was written by people who could not anticipate the technological changes that would happen in the future. This makes it difficult to anticipate and provide for changes to come, so courts are constantly playing catch-up as new technologies and new uses for those technologies are brought up. In addition, courts need to leave room for uncertainty in laws and decisions in order to allow for future technological change. Several cases make apparent the court’s struggle to consistently apply the Fourth Amendment to growing technologies: Kyllo v. United States, United States v. Andrus, and !!!!!! In Kyllo v. United States (2001), the police used a thermal imaging device in order to procure evidence that Kyllo was growing marijuana in his home. With the information obtained from the device, they were ... ... middle of paper ... ...future. These cases demonstrate the issues courts have faced in the categorizing of new technologies under the Fourth Amendment. They need to rely on figurative language to make comparisons when the technology is hard to comprehend or classify. They need to rule on whether there are limits of technology and its impacts on personal property and privacy. Finally, they need to question whether certain personal information can be considered private and whether public disclosure is necessary when companies give customer information to government entities. The law is rapidly changing in these areas, and it will take some time for the courts to catch up to technology and standardize rulings across the board. Works Cited Solove, Daniel J., and Paul M. Schwartz. Privacy, Information, and Technology. 3rd ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2011. Print.
The emergence of new and innovative technology can be used in many deceitful or secretive ways by law enforcement agencies to convict a suspect. The Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights has had a large influence in regulating the ways that law enforcement agencies may use technology against the everyday citizen. Technology can be used to obtain information on an individual without the individual being aware of the invasion of their privacy: e-mail accounts can be hacked, IP addresses can be traced, phones can be tapped and tracked, cars can be bugged.
The main subject in the Kyllo case deals with the advance in modern technology and how it relates to constitutional law. The overall question in this case is whether or not the use of thermal imaging technology should be used as a tool for searching the home of a person. The argument by the appellant, Mr. Kyllo, uses the unreasonable search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment as a defense against the use of thermal imaging systems without a warrant to search for illegal drug production inside his home. Kyllo v. U.S. is currently pending before the United States Supreme Court so the objective of this essay is to explain the procedural history of this case and to predict a final result and the implications of that prediction.
Communication surveillance has been a controversial issue in the US since the 1920's, when the Supreme Court deemed unwarranted wiretaps legitimate in the case of Olmstead v United States. Since telephone wires ran over public grounds, and the property of Olmstead was not physically violated, the wiretap was upheld as lawful. However, the Supreme Court overturned this ruling in 1967 in the landmark case of Katz v United States. On the basis of the fourth amendment, the court established that individuals have the right to privacy of communication, and that wiretapping is unconstitutional unless it is authorized by a search warrant. [Bowyer, 142-143] Since then, the right to communication privacy has become accepted as an integral facet of the American deontological code of ethics. The FBI has made an at least perfunctory effort to respect the public's demand for Internet privacy with its new Internet surveillance system, Carnivore. However, the current implementation of Carnivore unnecessarily jeopardizes the privacy of innocent individuals.
“The Fourth Amendment wasn't written for people with nothing to hide any more than the First Amendment was written for people with nothing to say.” (Dave Krueger). The Fourth Amendment protects the people's values, including the right of privacy. The Fourth Amendment includes, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, paper, effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure, shall not be violated.” When the founding fathers created the Constitution they ensured the people fundamental laws that would be used to any issue portrayed in the Supreme Court. That gave the people a relief that no one is ever above the law that is created. The privacy of the people was a very big value enforced by warrants. In the case of the
In 1787, the Constitution, created by a group of men known as the “Framers”, is the highest law in the United States. At first, the Constitution was not ratify because it did not have a bill of rights which is a list of rights that belong to the people. Therefore to allow changes to the Constitution, the Framers created the amendment process. In 1791, congress proposed twelve changes to the Constitution. Ten of the twelve changes were agreed to by the states and were called “The Bill of Rights.” Some of these rights include the right of free speech, the right to practice your own religion and the right to be silent if you are arrested.
It is a common known fact that the Bill of Rights serve as a type of contract between the government and the people that outlines the specific rights that each individual is entailed and the government cannot revoke those rights. The Fourth Amendment protects those accused of a crime by preventing officials from searching the home, property, or body of the accused without a valid reason or a search warrant. Despite being a crucial amendment in terms of the privacy and personal protection of an individual, the history behind the conception of the amendment and the history of the amendment in the modern day is not known to a majority of the American population.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” –U.S. Constitutional Amendments
... was instrumental to recognition of the constitutional right to privacy and the interpretation of the Ninth Amendment. This case shows that the Constitution is a living document that can be maneuvered to accommodate for the adaption of American peoples. While it is a stationary and unchanging document, unique interpretations can be gleamed.
The personal connection Americans have with their phones, tablets, and computers; and the rising popularity of online shopping and social websites due to the massive influence the social media has on Americans, it is clear why this generation is called the Information Age, also known as Digital Age. With the Internet being a huge part of our lives, more and more personal data is being made available, because of our ever-increasing dependence and use of the Internet on our phones, tablets, and computers. Some corporations such as Google, Amazon, and Facebook; governments, and other third parties have been tracking our internet use and acquiring data in order to provide personalized services and advertisements for consumers. Many American such as Nicholas Carr who wrote the article “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty, With Real Dangers,” Anil Dagar who wrote the article “Internet, Economy and Privacy,” and Grace Nasri who wrote the article “Why Consumers are Increasingly Willing to Trade Data for Personalization,” believe that the continuing loss of personal privacy may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy and see privacy as outdated and unimportant. Privacy is dead and corporations, governments, and third parties murdered it for their personal gain not for the interest of the public as they claim. There are more disadvantages than advantages on letting corporations, governments, and third parties track and acquire data to personalized services and advertisements for us.
“Smartphones and the 4th Amendment”. The New York Times. (27 Apr. 2014).Web. 28 Apr. 2014.
Solove, Daniel J. “5 Myths about Privacy” Washington Post: B3. Jun 16 2013. SIRS. Web. 10
LeRoux, Yves. "Privacy concerns in the digital world." 03 Oct 2013. Computer Weekly. 24 April 2014 .
As technology as advanced, so has our society. We are able to accomplish many tasks much easier, faster, and in effective ways. However, if looked at the harmful impact it has had on the society, one can realize that these are severe and really negative. One of the main concerns is privacy rights. Many people want that their information and personal data be kept in secrecy, however with today’s technology, privacy is almost impossible. No matter how hard one tries, information being leaked through technological advancements have become more and more common. With personal information being leaked, one does not know exactly how the information will be used, which validates the statement that privacy rights have been diminishing and should be brought to concern. Many people do not realize that their information is being used by third-parties and to consumer companies. In conclusion, technology has had a significant effect on privacy
Hughes, Kirsty. "A Behavioral Understanding of Privacy and Its Implications for Privacy Law." Modern Law Review 75.5 (2012): 806-836. Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 Apr. 2014.
Staff, Proquest. At Issue: Technology and Privacy. N.p.: ProQuest LLC, 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2013. .