THE GOVERNMENT HAD MY WIRES TAPPED: Litigating Title III Wiretaps

NACDL Spring Meeting & Seminar Search, Seizure & Criminal Litigation, April 18-21, 2018, New York City.

Brief of Amici Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, Center for Democracy & Technology, The Constitution Project and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner.

Argument: The number of cell phones and cell sites has dramatically increased in the last twenty years. Cell site location information (CSLI) paints a revealing portrait of a person’s movements. The number of law enforcement requests for location information – requests predominantly made without a warrant – is increasing. Certiorari is necessary to resolve the judicial split on whether a warrant is required to obtain CSLI, particularly as Americans expect these records to remain private.

Brief of Amici Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), CAIR California, CAIR Florida, CAIR New York, CAIR Ohio, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Defendant-Appellant.

Argument: Digital devices contain and access vast amounts of highly personal information. The border search exception is narrow. All border searches of digital devices, whether "manual" or "forensic," are highly intrusive of personal privacy and are thus "non-routine." A probable cause warrant should be required for boarder searches of data stored or accessible on digital devices. A probable cause warrant should be required given the highly personal information stored and accessible on digital devices. A probable cause warrant should be required because searching digital data is not tethered to the narrow purposes of the Border Search Exception.

Brief of Amici Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, Brennan Center for Justice, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), CAIR California, CAIR Florida, CAIR Missouri, CAIR New York, CAIR Ohio, CAIR Dallas/Fort Worth, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Defendant-Appellant.

Argument: Digital devices contain and access vast amounts of highly personal information. The border search exception is narrow. All border searches of digital devices, whether "manual" or "forensic," are highly invasive of personal privacy and are thus "non-routine." A probable cause warrant should be required for boarder searches of data stored or accessible on digital devices. A probable cause warrant should be required given the highly personal information stored and accessible on digital devices. A probable cause warrant should be required because searching digital data is not tethered to the narrow purposes of the boarder search exception.