I can't imagine how the Justice Sotomayor could have been any more clear in this issue: I would not assume that all information voluntarily disclosed to so

I can't imagine how the Justice Sotomayor could have been any more clear in this issue: I would not assume that all information voluntarily disclosed to some member of the public for a limited purpose is, for that reason alone, disentitled to Fourth Amendment protection. [citations omitted] Resolution of these difficult questions in this case is unnecessary, however, because the Government's physical intrusion on Jones' Jeep supplies a narrower basis for decision. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1259.pdf http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1259.pdf When Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan feel surveillance is so obviously unconstitutional as to provide an even narrower basis than actual trespassing, and Sotomayor writes a separate opinion for the sole purpose of conveying she'd be the 4th vote, I find it hard to imagine how any judge could uphold this surveillance in good faith.