Similarities Between The Us V. Jones And The Fourth Amendment

The United States v. Jones and the Fourth Amendment

By: Melinda Redwine
September 17, 2014
Ethics in Information Technology

Technology is a magnificent thing. A majority of people use some form of technology on a daily basis such as their telephones, computers, tablets, and even many devices on their cars. Many of these things are a necessity for a person to have daily, especially if they have to use these devices for work and/or school. Technology also helps people communicate with other people all over the world. Although, technology is a wonderful thing, how private is our information? And, when is it okay for the government to gather this information on specific citizens without their consent, even
v Jones revolutionized the way technology could be used when it pertains to the government and its citizens. “The Supreme Court has long held that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in public for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment. Because the Fourth Amendment turns on the existence of a reasonable expectation of privacy, the Court’s logic means that the Fourth Amendment provides no protection to surveillance in public” (Solove, 2012, pg. 1). Before the case United States v Jones anything that was obtained in public area was fair game to the government to gather on a citizen. The government did not need a search warrant if the acts were committed on public property. But, since a person’s vehicle is considered part of their private property, the action of placing the GPS on Jones’ vehicle was deem unconstitutional and the evidence was unusable in court. Private property is defined as “land or belongings owned by a person or group and kept for their exclusive use” (Goldberg, 2012, pg. 2). If the court case would have gone the other way, just think of everything the government could search if it were on public property. Police officers would claim that the search and seizer of a citizen’s phone and the information inside of it was constitutional by law and could be used in court because, they searched the phone on a public
Constitution: Fourth Amendment. Retrieved on September 10, 2014 from Cornell University Law School. http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment
Goldberg, E. (2012). How United States v. Jones Can Restore Our Faith in the Fourth Amendment, 110 Mich. L. Rev. First Impressions 6, http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/fi/110/goldberg.pdf
Solove, D (2012).United States v. Jones and the Future of Privacy Law: The Potential Far-Reaching Implications of the GPS Surveillance Case. Retrieved on September 4, 2014 from http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/dsolove/files/BNA-Jones-FINAL.pdf
Supreme Court of the United States: United States v Jones (Oct 2011). Retrieved on September 8, 1014 from http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1259.pdf
United States v. Jones: Concerning Warrantless GPS Installation and Tracking under the Fourth Amendment (2012). Retrieved on September 10, 2014 from