NCJ Number
195488
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology Volume: 92 Issue: 1 Dated: Fall 2001/Winter 2002 Pages: 1-126
Date Published
2001
Length
126 pages
Annotation
This article explores the meaning of Fourth Amendment privacy issues.
Abstract
The author argues that while Fourth Amendment case law is explicitly concerned with a citizen’s reasonable expectation of privacy, the Supreme Court has demonstrated a more lenient approach to privacy issues since the terrorist attacks in America. Police work presents a challenge to privacy issues in that the business of police is to thwart wrongdoing by effectively “snooping” into people’s lives. The author argues, however, that it is possible to reconcile a serious concern for privacy with necessary investigative police work. A central premise of Fourth Amendment case law is that police cannot egregiously trample on a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy. Therefore, the author argues that while the Supreme Court has held that police are entitled to special dispensation from normative privacy concerns, citizens should not have to anxiously protect themselves from privacy invasions. The Fourth Amendment is properly interpreted, according to the author, to mean that citizens should expect a certain degree of privacy without having to jealously guard it; citizens should enjoy an expectation of forbearance on the part of others. The author divides this paper into three sections. The first recounts the development of the Fourth Amendment privacy doctrine. In the second section, the author outlines his argument for the forbearance approach to privacy protection while the third section considers Court decisions about everyday criminal activity from a forbearance approach.