Standing Up: Digital Data and the 4th Amendment Collide

Protecting the 4th Amendment

In a recent appellate argument before the Federal Court of Appeal for the Sixth Circuit in Tennessee, Attorney Joshua Hedrick of Knox Defense shed light on a critical aspect of constitutional law: the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. This fundamental right, enshrined in United States jurisprudence, safeguards individuals, their papers, houses, and personal effects from arbitrary governmental intrusions. This bedrock principle of our law grew out of one of the colonists’ key complaints, that being that the King’s agents used general warrants to enter and search homes and businesses basically whenever they liked.

The crux of the argument revolved around the evolving nature of Fourth Amendment protections in the digital age. Traditionally, the Fourth Amendment has been interpreted to protect individuals from physical searches or seizures conducted without judicial oversight. However, as technological advancements have reshaped the landscape of privacy, courts have grappled with extending these protections to encompass new forms of intrusion.

The modern trouble is adapting the Fourth Amendment to our digital spaces. It is easy to apply the law to a search of a house or a suitcase, but things get more uncertain when it comes to someone’s digital data, especially data held by a private company. Some of this data is very personal in nature, like your pharmacy records or your purchase history.

Attorney Hedrick aptly pointed out that the Fourth Amendment is not confined to physical spaces but rather protects the privacy and security of individuals against all forms of arbitrary invasions by governmental officials. This principle has been reinforced by landmark Supreme Court cases, including Carpenter v. United States, which recognized the right to privacy in cell phone location data.

In this most recent appellate argument, the issue was how to adapt these principles to purchasing data held by Wal-Mart. Retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target, and Amazon maintain an enormous amount of data relating to a person’s purchases. This data is, basically, a snapshot of a person’s entire life. It can encompass things that we would not want to be public, such as what medications we are taking or what books we are reading.

The argument underscored the need to adapt Fourth Amendment jurisprudence to address novel forms of government intrusion. Just as the Fourth Amendment’s protections have evolved to encompass new technologies like thermal imaging cameras and cell phone location data, so too must our understanding of privacy rights in the digital age.

Moreover, Attorney Hedrick highlighted the societal norms and expectations that underpin the Fourth Amendment’s protection of privacy. Drawing on empirical research, he demonstrated that the vast majority of individuals consider certain types of data, such as online purchase history and personal information shared with websites, to be private and deserving of protection. 

In essence, the argument emphasized the importance of upholding constitutional principles in the face of technological advancements. It urged the court to recognize that the protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment are not static but must evolve to safeguard individuals’ privacy rights in an ever-changing world.

Ultimately, Attorney Hedrick’s advocacy before the Sixth Circuit exemplifies the crucial role of legal professionals in defending constitutional rights and ensuring that the law remains responsive to the challenges of the modern era. By advocating for a robust interpretation of the Fourth Amendment, Attorney Hedrick seeks to protect individuals’ privacy rights and uphold the principles of justice and fairness in our legal system.