3 ms·
A warrant is needed because there are explicit wiretapping laws that protect the content of phone communication. This was not a legal principle that was bootstr
by daxelrod 12y ago
A warrant is needed because there are explicit wiretapping laws that protect the content of phone communication. This was not a legal principle that was bootstrapped from an interpretation of the fourth amendment.
- snowwrestler 12y agoThere may be explicit laws for wiretapping phones, but the expectation of privacy in email does rest on the 4th Amendment. Here's an example of a ruling on emails that are held by a 3rd party: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/12/breaking-news-eff-victory-appeals-court-holds https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/12/breaking-news-eff-vict... So there does seem to be a weird double standard in the "3rd party doctrine" between content and routing information. I think if you asked 100 people on a random street what part of email they expect to be private, almost everyone would answer "all of it." I agree with the EFF that the Smith ruling is outdated. edit: clarity