Riley and the Third-party Doctrine

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Contact

On June 25, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued one groundbreaking opinion in two cases regarding cellphone searches incident to arrest. In a unanimous opinion, the court held that under the Fourth Amendment, police must obtain a warrant prior to searching the cellphone of an arrestee. The court found that the “immense storage capacity” of cellphones and their aggregation of data differentiated them from other items found on an arrestee’s person. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote that cellphones “could just as easily be called cameras, video players, rolodexes, calendars, tape recorders, libraries, diaries, albums, televisions, maps, or newspapers.”1

This commentary situates the Riley decision in the broader context of technology search cases and analyzes its potential implications for companies faced with a government request to turn over customer data. The Supreme Court’s acknowledgments of the altered technological landscape and the sensitivity of user data signal a potential shift in its third-party guidance, and its decision is a hopeful sign for companies seeking to protect user privacy in the face of digital data requests from the government.

Originally published in Westlaw Journal on April 9, 2015.

Please see full publication below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Written by:

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Contact
more
less

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide