Wilfred 1

3 April 2016
Exploratory Essay Assignment 7.2
The Fourth Amendment in the Digital World
The evolution of technological resources in our country has presented a dependency on
devices in work and everyday life of U.S. citizens. These technological advances have been
problematic in many areas, but causes particular concern as it relates to citizens rights under the
enforcement of the 4th amendment. Does the right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures extend to the use of
wires, GPS and other electronic assets?
Since its inception, the 4th amendment has always been a very complicated part of the Bill
of Rights. In todays world, those complications are further expanded because of all of the
numerous ways people have to communicate and disseminate information that they believe
should be protected under this right. Since the events of 911, the United States has become more
and more of a surveillance society, with new technological enhancements happening every day
for law enforcement and citizens alike. When is it acceptable for law enforcement to use
technology to obtain information and how much are citizens protected from illegal search and
seizures when information is obtained via the use of electronic devices? It is against this
backdrop that I find interest in this topic particularly, how it relates to the evolution of
technologies and how they change the landscape of an amendment that was designed to protect
the rights of citizens and provide them with a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The 4th amendment was introduced in 1798 and specifically stated, The right of the
people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,

Wilfred 2

supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized (Fourth Amendment). Is it possible that a bill that addressed
issues as they existed in the 1800s, where man lived in houses, which was viewed as his castle
and correspondence was generally in the form of written paper, could then extend to a society
where cell phones and GPSs now exist? I believe that the 4th is one of the most controversial
Amendments, because the philosophy around which it was established has become outdated and
unable to keep up with the rapid increase of todays technological resources.
The issue of reasonable expectation of privacy becomes cloudy when we are dealing with
a society that has witnessed the abuse of power with members of the law enforcement
community. Further, gray areas develop with questions around the use of technology to legally
obtain information on criminal activity. On the other hand, the use of new technologies allow
criminals to obtain and store information on their activities that was not available to them in the
past. Under these circumstances, how does society continue to ensure that the letter of the law
presented in the 4th Amendment is preserved, even under the extended digital capabilities of the
law enforcement community and citizens alike?
In the article, Digital-Era Privacy by David Cole, the writer specifically addresses the
issue of cell phones as it relates to 4th amendment rights. The writer described a Supreme Court
ruling, which unanimously agreed that police officers may not search an arrestees cellphone
without first obtaining a warrant, as one of the most important decisions regarding the 4th
amendment (Cole). He further stated that this decision was part of the transformation of the
Amendment to the twenty-first century (Cole). This is a point well taken, because in order for
the 4th Amendment to maintain its effectiveness, it will be important to ensure that issues
involving when and how to obtain warrants are determined by the standards of the 21st Century

Wilfred 3

and not by the 18th Century, under which the guidelines were originally written. Another ruling
during the same period stated that police must obtain a warrant to install a global positioning
device (GPS) to a car in order to monitor movements over an extended period of time (Cole).
As the writer put it the Court declined the governments invitation to mechanically apply predigital-era precedents to digital technology, which would have given police the ability to intrude
on privacy in previously unimaginable ways (Cole). This demonstrates how technology and
digital devices can add advantages on both sides, criminal and law enforcement and it proves that
the Courts need to clearly define how to address these issues as they relate to the 4th Amendment.
In her article, Digital Evidence, Major Jacqueline J. DeGaine discusses the importance
of how to collect digital evidence, while remaining in compliance with the 4th Amendment.
Digital Evidence is described as information obtained from electronic devices that are seized,
such as laptops, hard drives, Internet, mobile devices, desktop computers, and servers (DeGaine).
In our digital society, the amount of information that is stored electronically is extraordinary.
Having the ability to view the electronic resources of citizens, opens up a view to their world,
way of thinking, activities and lifestyle that are unprecedented. From the standpoint of citizens
intent on participating in criminal activity, they would be wise to understand the ramifications of
storing such information electronically. In retrieving such data, law enforcement professionals
will need to ensure that they are protecting the rights of citizens and are collecting data in a
manner that supports the guidelines under the 4th Amendment, which is to first and foremost in
the absence of consent, to obtain a warrant. While the benefits of obtaining electronic data are
rewarding to law enforcement and may ultimately play a role in convicting criminals, it is critical
to ensure that such information is obtained legally and without prejudice.

Wilfred 4

The 4th Amendment, put in place with the well intention of ensuring that the rights of a
citizen to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, has taken on the challenge of being perceived as one of the most complicated
Amendments in the face of dealing with advances of the 21st Century. The issues surrounding
the Amendment will only continue to magnify as the evolution of technological advances
increase and become more and more sophisticated in the years and centuries to come. As a
Black female, who has witnessed the unfair treatment of minorities in urban communities, it
gives me pause to know that there is so much ambiguity surrounding this issue. It further causes
concern that members of society will not always necessarily be free from unreasonable search
and seizures. Also of concern, is the ability for law enforcement to intrude on the rights of
citizens, through previously inconceivable methods. For example, there has been a recent debate
in some communities about whether or not police should have the ability to listen in on the cell
phone calls of average citizens. If this capability does not bring to question the right to an
expectation of privacy, I dont know what does.
The landscape has changed drastically. The framers of the 4th Amendment would not
have been able to imagine how the changes in information gathering would have affected the
language included in the law, which at the time was simple; persons, houses, papers and effects.
How could they have known that there would be a need to define this Amendment even further
to include, wire, digital transmissions, smart devices and a thing called the Internet?

Works Cited
Cole, David. "Digital-Era Privacy." Nation 299, (2014): 4. Web. 30 March 2016.

Wilfred 5

DeGaine, Jacquleine. Digital Evidence. Army Lawyer, (2013): 7. Web. 30 March 2016.
Fourth Amendment. Cornell University Law School. (n.d.). Web. 30 March 2016.