Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
 iNo. 10-1259In the
Supreme Court of the United States
U
NITED
S
TATES OF
 A 
MERICA 
,
 
 Petitioner
,
 
v. A 
NTOINE
J
ONES
,
 Respondent.
 On Writ of Certiorari to the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
BRIEF OF
 AMICUS CURIAE 
 THE CATO INSTITUTEIN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT
I
LYA 
S
HAPIRO
 J
 AMES
W.
 
H
 ARPER
Counsel of Record
T
IMOTHY 
L
 YNCH
 P
 AUL
J
OSSEY 
 Cato Institute1000 Mass. Ave., NWWashington, D.C. 20001 jharper@cato.org(202)
 
842-0200
Counsel for
 Amicus Curiae
 
i
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Whether the police violate the Fourth Amend-ment when they install a GPS device to tracksomeone’s movements for nearly a month.2. Whether the police violate the Fourth Amend-ment when they attach a GPS device to some-one’s car without a warrant.
 
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.......................................iv
 
INTEREST OF
 AMICUS CURIAE 
............................1
 
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT.....................................1
 
 ARGUMENT...............................................................2
 
I. THIS COURT SHOULD UNITE THEMAJORITY’S DECISION IN
 KATZ 
WITHTHE “REASONABLE EXPECTATION OFPRIVACY” LANGUAGE IN JUSTICEHARLAN’S CONCURRENCE TO DECIDETHIS CASE............................................................2 A.
 Katz
Rested on the Physical and Legal Pro-tections Given To Information, Not on Jus-tice Harlan’s Concurrence or on “Reason-able Expectations ”...........................................3B. Taken Alone, Justice Harlan’s
 Katz
Con-currence Created a Confusing, UnworkableTest....................................................................6C. This Court Has Not Successfully Appliedthe “Reasonable Expectation of Privacy”Test as the Sole Decision Rule in Subse-quent Cases.......................................................9D. Applied as the Sole Decision Rule, the“Reasonable Expectation of Privacy” TestReverses the Inquiry Required by theFourth Amendment and ImbalancesFourth Amendment Doctrine.........................12
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.

    • More From This User

    42 p.
    Shelby County v. Holder
    Cato Institute
    26 Reads
    74 p.
    Ilagan v. Ungacta
    Cato Institute
    30 Reads
    41 p.
    Horne v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
    Cato Institute
    28 Reads
    26 p.
    Lepak v. City of Irving
    Cato Institute
    33 Reads
    40 p.
    Kerr v. Hickenlooper
    Cato Institute
    24 Reads
    31 p.
    Kachalsky v. Cacace
    Cato Institute
    41 Reads
    17 p.
    Salinas v. Texas
    Cato Institute
    22 Reads
    35 p.
    Hollingsworth v. Perry
    Cato Institute
    27 Reads
    25 p.
    United States v. Windsor
    Cato Institute
    36 Reads
    23 p.
    Sekhar v. United States
    Cato Institute
    24 Reads
    19 p.
    City of Tombstone v. United States
    Cato Institute
    27 Reads
    20 p.
    Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States
    Cato Institute
    24 Reads
    19 p.
    Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society I...
    Cato Institute
    36 Reads
    30 p.
    United States v. Kebodeaux
    Cato Institute
    30 Reads
    37 p.
    Brandt v. United States
    Cato Institute
    73 Reads
    7 p.
    Infrastructure Investment: A State, Local, and Private Responsibility
    Cato Institute
    44 Reads
    52 p.
    Spending Beyond Our Means: How We Are Bankrupting Future Generations
    Cato Institute
    32 Reads
    27 p.
    The Use of Public Assistance Benefits by Citizens and Non-citizen ...
    Cato Institute
    44 Reads
    6 p.
    License to Drill: The Case for Modernizing America's Crude Oil and ...
    Cato Institute
    58 Reads
    4 p.
    The Challenges of Negotiating a Transatlantic Trade and Investment...
    Cato Institute
    70 Reads
    8 p.
    Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits at a Lower Rate than Poor Nativ...
    Cato Institute
    42 Reads
    2 p.
    OECD Launches New Effort to Undermine Tax Competition
    Cato Institute
    41 Reads
    64 p.
    50 Vetoes: How States Can Stop the Obama Health Care Law
    Cato Institute
    36 Reads
    36 p.
    A Rational Response to the Privacy "Crisis"
    Cato Institute
    33 Reads
    28 p.
    China, America, and the Pivot to Asia
    Cato Institute
    41 Reads
    Notes
    Load more