By Jake Laperruque Editor's note: Jake is responding to the original version of our second post on Riley v. California. In my opinion, this post’s critique of the Riley decision is wrong for several reasons: First, it complains that the Court did not draw an impossible distinction. There is no realistic way to make a legal distinction between smartphones and “dumb phones” (aka feature phones). Feature phones do have less memory for contacts, personal notes, photos, and files (audio, video, …
Unfortunately, Resolving Wurie Perfunctorily may Weaken Riley
By Noah Marks Part 2 in a 2-part series Editor's note: At the author's request, this post has been revised substantially since its original posting to more clearly express the author's intent. Earlier today, the Supreme Court issued an opinion covering both Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie, holding that police must obtain a warrant before searching cell phones. Even though the decision ostensibly resolved both cases, the Court’s reasoning and rhetoric clearly focused on Riley, …
Continue Reading about Unfortunately, Resolving Wurie Perfunctorily may Weaken Riley →
The Fourth Amendment for the 21st Century
By Daniel Bogdan Part 1 in a 2-part series Editor's note: At the request of the author, the title has been changed since the original publication of this post. Today, in Riley v. California, the Supreme Court held that law enforcement officers may not search an arrested person’s cellphone incident to arrest without a warrant. Ruling jointly along with United States v. Wurie, the Court held that an individual’s right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment outweighed the interest of law …
Continue Reading about The Fourth Amendment for the 21st Century →