The feds had thermal cameras hooked up to a helicopter, flew over some guy's house, saw thermal signatures looking a lot like someone growing marijuana.
Supreme court threw this out as a warrantless search because people are allowed an expectation of privacy against tech that "everyday people" don't have.
IANAL, but if you don't buy this logic, then search warrants are mostly limited by tech? Like if the gov't invented binoculars that could see through walls, does that mean they could just look into your house without a warrant?
The search warrant is about intent and expectations. And while "police officer checks records manually of a person" is kinda expected, "police officer x-rays an entire crowd instantly" seems a bit less so.
We _do_ put up signs about cameras, and there's rules about recording phone conversations too. It sure feels like there's case law around a lot of this.
The feds had thermal cameras hooked up to a helicopter, flew over some guy's house, saw thermal signatures looking a lot like someone growing marijuana.
Supreme court threw this out as a warrantless search because people are allowed an expectation of privacy against tech that "everyday people" don't have.
IANAL, but if you don't buy this logic, then search warrants are mostly limited by tech? Like if the gov't invented binoculars that could see through walls, does that mean they could just look into your house without a warrant?
The search warrant is about intent and expectations. And while "police officer checks records manually of a person" is kinda expected, "police officer x-rays an entire crowd instantly" seems a bit less so.
We _do_ put up signs about cameras, and there's rules about recording phone conversations too. It sure feels like there's case law around a lot of this.