More information from a professor of law at GW (cross-posted from the other submission about this topic): > What makes this tricky, I think, is that Dreamhost

More information from a professor of law at GW (cross-posted from the other submission about this topic): > What makes this tricky, I think, is that Dreamhost is only involved in the initial search stage of a two-stage warrant. Computer warrants are ordinarily executed in two stages. First, the government gets access to all the electronic records. Next, the government searches through the records for the particularly described evidence. Courts have broadly allowed the government to follow this two-step procedure, in which they get all the stuff in the initial stage of electronic evidence warrants so that they can search it for the relevant evidence. Given that, Dreamhost’s objection is slightly off. As I read it, Dreamhost is essentially challenging the widely accepted two-stage warrant practice. Some federal magistrate judges in the “magistrate’s revolt” have made that argument, but they generally have been overruled at the district court level. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/08/15/a-closer-look-at-dojs-warrant-to-collect-website-records/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...