United States v. Jones
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
10-1259 D.C. Cir. Nov 8, 2011
Issue: (1) Whether the warrantless use of a tracking device on respondent’s vehicle to monitor its movements on public streets violated the Fourth Amendment; and (2) whether the government violated respondent’s Fourth Amendment rights by installing the GPS tracking device on his vehicle without a valid warrant and without his consent.
Plain English Issue: Whether the Constitution allows police to put a tracking device on a car without either a warrant or the owner’s permission; and whether the Constitution is violated when police use the tracking device to keep track of the car’s whereabouts.
For links to SCOTUS coverage of this case, as well as other materials, visit United States v. Jones : SCOTUSblog.
- Can Cops Use GPS to Track You? (abcnews.go.com)
- Editorial: The Court’s GPS Test (nytimes.com)
- How GPS tracking threatens our privacy (cnn.com)
- Supreme Court Set to Hear Landmark GPS Tracking Case (pcworld.com)
- Supreme Court To Decide Major GPS Tracking Case (geodatapolicy.wordpress.com)
- Feds Shift Defense of Cellphone Tracking (online.wsj.com)
By Jennifer Valentino-DeVries, Digits, Wall Street Journal, September 22, 2011
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures” – but what does that mean when it comes to techniques that use technology rather than a physical search that is easy to see? In many ways, it remains unclear. But there a few key issues that courts have been considering lately when it comes to this question. First up: whether the activity being observed by the technology is outside or inside a person’s house. …
For full text of the article, visit: How Technology Is Testing the Fourth Amendment – Digits – WSJ.
- How Technology Is Testing the Fourth Amendment (blogs.wsj.com)
- Second Circuit Divides 6 – 6 on Rehearing Standing Case to Challenge FISA Amendments Act (volokh.com)
- No Right to Anonymity (nytimes.com)
The Mark of Science: Fourth Amendment Implications of Remote Sensing in Criminal Law
Surya Gablin Gunasekara, Journal of Space Law, October 2010
Abstract: The government’s use of technology must be weighed in the Fourth Amendment balance not because the Constitution constrains the government to employ antiquated surveillance techniques but because the march of science over the course of this century has time and again laid bare secrets that society had (erroneously) assumed to lie safely beyond the perception of government.
For full text of the article, click here.