212-227-8877
  • Attorneys
    • Joseph Tacopina
    • Chad Seigel
    • Matthew Deoreo
  • Practice Areas
    • Criminal Law
    • Civil Litigation
  • Notable Cases
  • Firm Overview
  • Featured Articles
  • Media
    • TV Appearances
    • Radio Mentions
    • International Press
    • In The News
    • Thought Leadership

Did My iPhone Steal My Privacy?

By Joseph Tacopina Published July 9, 2013
Civil Litigation

The United State Supreme Court has not quite decided what constitutes an expectation of privacy in this new Facebook, Twitter and Global-Positioning-System (GPS) world.

In a decision issued in January 2012, United States v. Jones, the justices agreed that police who physically placed a GPS device on a suspect’s car without a warrant had violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The majority opinion, penned by Justice Scalia and joined by a strange bedfellow — Justice Sotomayor, along with Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Thomas and Kennedy — reached its decision without much fuss. “The Government physically occupied private property for the purpose of obtaining information. We have no doubt that such a physical intrusion would have been considered a ‘search’ within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when it was adopted.“ Because there was this physical intrusion, the majority said it had no reason to further explore what an expectation of privacy might be in these modern digital days.

Surprisingly Justice Alito wrote a concurring opinion, joined by the Court’s liberal members: Justices Breyer, Ginsburg and Kagan.

  • Alito questioned the majority’s analysis as being too narrow, claiming it ignores the implication of the technology that permits surveillance electronically without trespass. Changing technology means changing expectations of privacy among reasonable people. According to Alito, we might agree to give up privacy for convenience.
  • Justice Sotomayor wrote a separate concurring opinion. She worried that storage of long-term surveillance and mining can have a chilling effect. “I would ask whether people reasonably expect that their movements will be recorded and aggregated in a manner that enables the Government to ascertain, more or less at will, their political and religious beliefs, sexual habits, and so on.”

These changing expectations of privacy have great importance in protecting constitutional rights from government intrusion. Lawyers with experience handling constitutional rights cases will know how to raise and litigate these important issues to curb government excesses.

footer footer-mobile

Let the best
in the business

defend you.

Call us for a free consultation 24/7

PHONE
212-227-8877
ADDRESS

275 Madison Avenue, 35th Floor,
New York, New York 10016

Background Image Background Image
  • Firm Overview
  • Attorneys
  • Practice Areas
    • Criminal Law
    • Civil Litigation
  • Notable Cases
    • Notable Criminal Cases
    • Notable Civil Cases
  • Media
    • Thought Leadership
    • Featured Articles
    • In The News
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • facebookFacebook
  • twitterTwitter
  • linkedinLinkedIn
  • instagramInstagram
  • lawyersLawyers.com

Tacopina Seigel & DeOreo is located in New York, NY and serves clients in and around New York, Long Island City, Sunnyside, Astoria, Brooklyn, Woodside, Maspeth, Middle Village, Jackson Heights, Elmhurst, Ridgewood, East Elmhurst, Bronx, Rego Park, Corona, Forest Hills, Woodhaven, College Point, Ozone Park, Jamaica, Howard Beach, Bronx County, Kings County, New York County and Queens County.

Attorney Advertising. This website is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. [ Do Not Sell My Personal Information ]

© 2023 Tacopina Seigel Trial Lawyers
Design by SPINX Digital