Jump to content

Talk:Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.135.14.59 (talk) at 22:27, 17 October 2022 (Essential Text: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured article candidateFourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleFourth Amendment to the United States Constitution has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 19, 2013Good article nomineeListed
February 22, 2014Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

Metadata ruling

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/09/02/13-50572.pdf:

The panel affirmed the convictions of four members of the Somali diaspora for sending, or conspiring to send, $10,900 to Somalia to support a foreign terrorist organization, in an appeal that raised complex questions regarding the U.S. government’s authority to collect bulk data about its citizens’ activities under the auspices of a foreign intelligence investigation, as well as the rights of criminal defendants when the prosecution uses information derived from foreign intelligence surveillance.

The panel held that the government may have violated the Fourth Amendment when it collected the telephony metadata of millions of Americans, including at least one of the defendants, pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), but that suppression is not warranted on the facts of this case.

Jeffrey Walton (talk) 21:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This case does not appear to be a ruling on the 4A. Do you want this case added to the article? If yes, where? SMP0328. (talk) 23:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Essential Text

Unreasonable search = invasion of privacy (hence unconstitutional)
Unreasonable seizure = theft (by government, hence unlawful, hence unconstitutional)

76.135.14.59 (talk) 22:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC) Tae Hyun Song[reply]