Constitutional law and the criminal justice

Answer the following essay question using your text, assigned book, and any relevant sources. The text for this course is Harr, J. S., Hess, K. M., Orthmann, C. M., & Kingsbury, J. (2018). Constitutional law and the criminal justice ISBN:978-1305966468 Case references: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katz_v._United_States 1967 (The government prohibited from bugging a public telephone booth.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Jones_(2012) The government cannot attach a concealed GPS tracking device to your vehicle without a warrant.) See also Carpenter v US, decided June 2018, cell phone location records require a warrant. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-402_h315.pdf Article on Privacy https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/opinion/the-future-of-privacy.html?_r=0 New Amendment to NH Constitution https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/11/new-hampshire-privacy-amendment-passes-by-huge-margin/ Question; Evolving Expectation of Privacy Debate I recall recently reading an article in Fosters Daily Democrat about a young woman who was employed at a nursing home. She had apparently video taped an interaction with an elderly patient and had showed it to co-workers, and possibly further discussed the incident on social media. The article went on to say the police were investigating the incident as a potential assault. I did not see the follow up, but wondered to myself if the young woman continued to have an expectation of privacy in the video on her phone, or should it be seized by police for evidence. (You can use the above scenario, or make up one of your own to answer your essay exam.) Begin by summarizing the Katz and the Jones case. (Consider listening to the oral argument in Jones). In US v Jones, the Supreme Court significantly expanded the expectation of privacy area to include where you drive your vehicle in public everyday. However, during oral argument, Justice Alito stated that people’s use of technology is changing what the expectation of privacy is for the courts. “You know, I don’t know what society expects and I think it’s changing. Technology is changing people’s expectations of privacy. Suppose we look forward 10 years, and maybe 10 years from now 90 percent of the population will be using social networking sites and they will have on average 500 friends and they will have allowed their friends to monitor their location 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, through the use of their cell phones. Then — what would the expectation of privacy be then? ” (Source Wikipedia). The U.S. Supreme Court has significantly expanded the meaning of expectation of privacy to include where you travel in public, yet that same information may already be public via social media, facebook, youtube, or other technology that already tracks a person. 1. Given that much of our personal information is stored electronically on our tablets or phone, and we already shared something about that same information with various third parties on social media, do you believe the U.S. Supreme Court will continue to require the government to obtain a warrant and shield that personal information as having an expectation of privacy? Or will future evolving technology make our expectation of privacy on our personal electronic devices irrelevant because there is no such thing as privacy, or a reduced expectation, in our technological society. Support your answer. 2. New Hampshire, the “Live Free or Die” state recently amended the state constitution with the following language, “An individual’s right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent.” How do you see the NH Supreme Court ruling on personal information on a cell phone that may have also been shared on social media. Does a person forfeit their expectation of privacy when they post something about the data on facebook or twitter? Under the new amendment, would a person still have an expectation of privacy of the data on their cell phone? Support your answer