DrugPolicyCases.com | |||
|
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy The Fourth Amendment protects the people against unreasonable searches and seizures. The test for what's unreasonable is the "reasonable expectation of privacy": if a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in an item or a dwelling to be searched, the search will be considered unreasonable (and thus, unconstitutional) unless a warrant is obtained. This category contains excerpts from various court opinions that shed light on this issue. Pages: ‹1› ‹2› ‹3› ‹4› ‹5› ‹6›
The settled rule is [...] an expectation of privacy that society recognizes as reasonable. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 361, 19 L. Ed. 2d 576, 88 S. Ct. 507 (1967) (Harlan, J., concurring). The application of that rule involves consideration of the kind of place in which the individual claims the privacy interest and what expectations of privacy are traditional and well recognized.
[...]
Expectations of privacy and property interests govern the analysis of Fourth Amendment search and seizure claims. Participants in a criminal conspiracy may have such expectations or interests, but the conspiracy itself neither adds to nor detracts from them.
[...]
Under normal Fourth Amendment analysis, the individual's expectation of privacy is an important factor in the equation. But here, the Court perversely relies on the fact that a candidate for office gives up so much privacy -- "candidates for public office ... are subject to relentless scrutiny -- by their peers, the public and the press," [...] -- as a reason for sustaining a Fourth Amendment claim. The Court says, in effect, that the kind of drug test for candidates required by the Georgia law is unnecessary, because the scrutiny to which they are already subjected by reason of their candidacy will enable people to detect any drug use on their part.
[...]
|
|