THE MOSAIC THEORY OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT

被引:11
作者
Kerr, Orin S. [1 ]
机构
[1] George Washington Univ, Sch Law, Washington, DC 20052 USA
关键词
TECHNOLOGIES;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
In the Supreme Court's recent decision on GPS surveillance, United States v. Jones, five justices authored or joined concurring opinions that applied a new approach to interpreting Fourth Amendment protection. Before Jones, Fourth Amendment decisions had always evaluated each step of an investigation individually. Jones introduced what we might call a "mosaic theory" of the Fourth Amendment, by which courts evaluate a collective sequence of government activity as an aggregated whole to consider whether the sequence amounts to a search. This Article considers the implications of a mosaic theory of the Fourth Amendment. It explores the choices and puzzles that a mosaic theory would raise, and it analyzes the merits of the proposed new method of Fourth Amendment analysis. The Article makes three major points. First, the mosaic theory represents a dramatic departure from the basic building block of existing Fourth Amendment doctrine. Second, adopting the mosaic theory would require courts to answer a long list of novel and challenging questions. Third, courts should reject the theory and retain the traditional sequential approach to Fourth Amendment analysis. The mosaic approach reflects legitimate concerns, but implementing it would be exceedingly difficult in light of rapid technological change. Courts can better respond to the concerns animating the mosaic theory within the traditional parameters of the sequential approach to Fourth Amendment analysis.
引用
收藏
页码:311 / 354
页数:44
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
Abbott E., 1963, FLATLAND ROMANCE MAN
[2]  
[Anonymous], BOSTON COLL LAW REV
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1952, I LOVE LUCY JOB SWIT
[4]  
[Anonymous], YALE L J ONLINE
[5]  
Cole SA, 2009, STANFORD LAW REV, V61, P1335
[6]  
de Vogue Ariane, 2012, YAHOO NEWS 0307
[7]  
Dennis E.S., 2011, Cardozo Law Review, V33, P737
[8]  
Kerr OS, 2007, STANFORD LAW REV, V60, P503
[9]  
Kerr OS, 2011, HARVARD LAW REV, V125, P476
[10]  
Kerr OS, 2009, MICH LAW REV, V107, P951