In United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), having reached the conclusion that that was a search under the Fourth Amendment, but the court declined to reach when the installation of the device is reasonable or unreasonable. So, we just know that the installation of the device is a Fourth Amendment “search” but we actually don’t yet know if a warrant is required to install a GPS device.
In Carpenter v. United States 585 U. S. ____ (2018), the ruling was very narrow and did not affect other parts of the third-party doctrine, such as banking records, nor overruled prior decisions concerning conventional surveillance techniques and tools. The court did not expand its ruling on other matters related to cellphones not presented in Carpenter and did not consider other collection techniques involving foreign affairs or national security issues.

x

Hi!
I'm Katy

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out