Writer: Caroline Clark
Editor: Leo Olmos
November 5, 2023
In an era defined by rapid technological advancements and the proliferation of digital data, the Supreme Court of the United States plays a central role in shaping the legal framework that defines and safeguards our digital privacy rights and continues to address the complex and ever-evolving issues in ways that you might not be aware of. Digital privacy is a multifaceted concept that extends far beyond our social media passwords or other common online communications. It incorporates our right to keep personal data, ranging from location history to sensitive information, safe from unwarranted government intrusion. The Supreme Court’s decisions on these matters provide essential guidance, ensuring that our rights follow the ever-evolving landscape of technology.
Defining the boundaries of digital landmark decisions, the Supreme Court of the United States most notably laid the foundation for individuals’ reasonable expectation of privacy through the case of Katz v. United States (1967). The Court held that wiretapping a public telephone booth without a warrant violated the Fourth Amendment and its protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. This ruling fundamentally altered the legal landscape by affirming that warrantless wireless tapping, even in a public space, contravened an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment serves as a critical turning point of privacy protection in the United States by extending these protections to encompass a previously unforeseen context, safeguarding citizens from unwarranted government intrusion into their personal lives. This case laid the foundation for a broader understanding of privacy rights in an increasingly connected and technologically driven society in the face of evolving circumstances.
As technology continued to advance, new challenges arose defining digital privacy. In Carpenter v. United States (2018), the Supreme Court held that the government must obtain a warrant to access an individual’s historical cell phone location data. This decision marked a critical step in recognizing individual privacy preservation in the digital age. The influence of Carpenter extends beyond this landmark case. In 2019, the state of Georgia argued that a legal doctrine dating back to the early 20th century should give police the authority to obtain vast and detailed data modern cars collect on us like the car’s speed and call record and text history without a warrant. The doctrine, known as “vehicle exemption” enables police to search a car for physical items without a warrant due to the “ready mobility of vehicles” which might leave the scene before they can obtain a warrant. However, Carpenter makes clear, that old rules can’t be mechanically applied to override people’s unprecedented privacy interests in new kinds of sensitive digital data. Carpenter concludes that, in our digital age, our private information remains private under the protection of the Fourth Amendment because we store this information on a “third party” server. In today’s digital age, it is almost impossible to have no trace of sensitive data through the personal devices and platforms of the companies with which we involve ourselves. Carpenter ensures that we do not forfeit our Fourth Amendment rights simply because we own technological devices and drive a car.
The Supreme Court’s decisions on digital privacy strike a delicate balance between the needs of law enforcement and the fundamental rights of individuals to privacy and protection against unwarranted government intrusion. It underscores the enduring relevance of our constitutional protections and the responsibility we all share in upholding them. These decisions on digital privacy remind us that the law must adapt to not only the technological advancements and evolving nature and privacy but to the broader modern implications of the entire legal spectrum as we advance as a society.
References
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967). Justia Law. (n.d.).
Wessler, N. (2023, February 27). The Supreme Court’s most consequential ruling for privacy
in the Digital age, one year in: ACLU. American Civil Liberties Union. https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/supreme-courts-most-consequential-ruling-privacy-digital
Comments