The Importance Of Privacy Laws In The United States

We all expect to have privacy in our homes, but just how much privacy do we actually have? In Oregon, DLK was suspected to be growing marijuana in his home, so the police used thermal imaging, without a warrant, to provide evidence to arrest him. DLK claimed that his right to protection from search and seizure, provided by the fourth amendment, was violated. The Supreme Court then had to decide if the thermal imaging scan infringed DLK’s fourth amendment rights. While he may have been growing marijuana in his home, the U.S. Government violated his fourth amendment rights when they used thermal imaging, without a warrant, to gather evidence.

The Fourth Amendment is the first line protection against the government and their officials from violating our privacy. The Fourth Amendment provides safeguards to individuals during searches and detentions, and prevents unlawfully seized items from being used as evidence in criminal cases. The degree of protection available in a particular case depends on the nature of the detention or arrest, the characteristics of the place searched, and the circumstances under which the search takes place. This Amendment protects us in the following situations such as being questioned while walking down the street, being pulled over while driving, entering individual’s homes for arrest and searching of evidence while there. In most scenarios, police officer may not search or seize an individual or his or her property unless the officer has a valid search warrant, a valid arrest warrant, or a belief rising to the

What do you think invades the privacy of one person? What are your expectations of privacy? Well, in the case of Carroll vs The United States, Carroll was arrested in his car for carrying alcohol during the prohibition era, establishing that one did not need a warrant to search a car because the evidence can move. In DLK’s case however, the big question was if the police could use thermal imagers, to look at the heat coming out of DLK’s house without a warrant. DLK’s privacy was not invaded because a thermal imager only shows heat loss from general areas of a home and a thermal imager is available to the public, for anyone to use. Using evidence from Carroll's case, Justice John Paul Adams statement and a brief example of how thermal imaging, one can come to a superb conclusion.

The founding fathers of the United States of America fought hard to achieve an independent nation. An independent nation containing freedoms and rights for citizens that only the constitution can guarantee. One of the crucial rights guaranteed to U.S citizens today is the right to privacy, or the right to be left alone according to Brandeis and Warren. The right to privacy is not specifically mentioned in the constitution, it is however mentioned in the bill of rights. The bill of rights is the first ten amendments of the constitution, which protects many civil rights and liberties of all U.S citizens. The debate today is whether the constitution protects the privacy of citizens from being regulated and invaded by federalism.

"Reasonable expectation of privacy" is a legal term based on standards and norms about privacy which are held by a society. In the US, the case "Katz v. United States" was the first time the term "reasonable expectation of privacy" was used. What "...a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection…. But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."[10] This decision provided a precedent to be used in future cases to determine what can be considered private, protected information. Further rulings based on this precedent have established that the expectations of a

Law enforcement officers are known to “hunt for property or communications believed to be evidence of crime, and the act of taking possession of this property,” also known as conducting a search and seizure. It is a necessary exercise in the ongoing pursuit of criminals. Search and seizures are used to produce evidence for the prosecution of alleged criminals. Protecting citizens from arbitrary searches, the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution is our right to limit and deny any unreasonable search and seizure. More often than not, police officers tend to take advantage of their authority by the use of coercion. Although it is unlawful, most citizens do not know what police officers can and cannot do in respect of their human rights.

"59 Radio Address about the American Right of Privacy. February 23, 1974." American Reference Library - Primary Source Documents, Jan. 2001, p. 1. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mih&AN=32360825.

We Americans are very fortunate that we have one of the top ten amendments that grant us the right to our privacy not being violated. The Fourth Amendment search and seizure clause focuses primarily on privacy; and this is enforced to ensure that citizens are protected against unreasonable searches and seizures. It also does not matter what level of law enforcement jurisdiction an officer is apart of, whether it be State or Federal they are not allowed to violate this right. This particular amendment has been ameliorated many times, and that is to meet the needs of the American people. This paper shall discuss the following: the history and purpose of the Fourth Amendment, an explanation of whether or not the United States requires police to

In recent times there has been a growing number of concerns regarding the way police officers perform arrests. Along with these arrests are searches conducted by officers which can sometimes be unconstitutional. The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution protects its citizens by giving “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” (U.S. Const., amend. IV). This amendment aims to prevent officers from conducting random searches of a citizens’ property and aims to give them a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The Fourth Amendment provides citizen the freedom of privacy. The expectation of privacy is covered under the Fourth Amendment in order to protect this privacy. I strongly believe that an officer should obtain a search warrant in order to violate one's right to privacy when crossing the boundary of personal items. By searching an individual backpack, purse or wallet, one's privacy is invaded. According to the court in People v. Cregan personal items such as cigarette packs (found in pockets), wallets, or purses may be searched due to these items being inaccessibility of the individual at the time of an arrest. This ruling allows officers to violate one's privacy by searching these items; even though, the items are personal to the individual.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” Sound familiar? Well it should. That quote was a section of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Those lines are one of the many things that set America apart from other countries around the world. It has protected us for centuries from “unreasonable searches and seizures…” made by anyone, including the government. This is all beginning to change with the inventions of the smartphone, computer, and even GPS. These inventions have possibly turned our world for the better, or maybe even for the worse.

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution emphatically states that “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause (Legal Information Institute 1.1).” Although the Fourth Amendment protects the privacy of people, today’s technology has led to privacy issues that need to be addressed. For example, when people comment on Twitter, it and a few other digital companies keep all the comments a person has ever posted (Daniel Zwerdling 1.2). Similarly, warrants must be used at all times if people are seizing information from someone, but searching through metadata does not require a warrant and there is no cause. Another issue is camera surveillance, which captures people who have not committed a crime, and security people do not need a warrant to

In this article, American Taught Police: Surveillance in the “Land of Freedom,” the author Nikki Jones talks and describes taught of being followed by technology everywhere you go. She talks about the consequences and the civil rights and liberties that the American Taught Police may steal form the citizen. She describes that device as the tracking device and that device follows you. She brings up the question of the fourth Amendment. The fourth amendment is supposed to protect the rights of the citizen through “Search and seizure.” In the second paragraph, the author, Nikki Jones, talks about how the FBI and the NSA collecting so much data without any warrants because there is a question of national security.

In 1787, the constitution was born. The constitution has been America’s guideline to the American way of life. Our US constitution has many points in it to protect America and it’s people from an overpowered government, our economy, and ourselves. The only thing the constitution doesn’t directly give us, is our right to privacy, and our right to privacy has been a big concern lately courtesy of the National Security Agency (NSA).(#7) Although our constitution doesn’t necessarily cover the privacy topic, it does suggest that privacy is a given right. Some people say that the right to privacy was so obvious, that our founding fathers didn’t even feel the need to make a point about it.(#9) It also didn’t help

The topic of this paper is privacy. It will talk about the ethical and legal reasons for maintain privacy. The audience for this paper is high school level teachers in a school with one-to-one devices for every student.