I'm reading the actual opinion [1], and I feel The EFF article misrepresents it. The case doesn't really hinge on aerial surveillance, but the telephoto lens th

I'm reading the actual opinion [1], and I feel The EFF article misrepresents it. The case doesn't really hinge on aerial surveillance, but the telephoto lens they used on the flight. The cases sited in the opinion suggest that a naked eye aerial surveillance flight could be acceptable, and to me leaves open the questions of drones with normal cameras. The discussion around curtilage is interesting, but people's subjective impression of what the private spaces around their home are, are going to vary widely by context (as discussed in the opinion). [1] https://casetext.com/case/state-v-mckelvey-9 https://casetext.com/case/state-v-mckelvey-9