Watch the video and read more on The Federalist Society website
"Though Justice Neil Gorsuch filed one of the four dissenting opinions in Carpenter v. United States, his opinion reads more like a concurrence than a dissent. In it, he sets forth a property rights-based argument for the protection of cell phone data under the Fourth Amendment and clearly rejects the “Third-Party Doctrine”—the long-standing Supreme Court doctrine that if someone voluntary turns over information to a third party they have no reasonable expectation of privacy in that information.
What are the potential implications of Justice Gorsuch’s reasoning in his Carpenter dissent? What does his dissent mean for privacy advocates? How does the decision in Carpenter align with the Supreme Court’s past decisions on the Fourth Amendment? In this episode of POLICYbrief, Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy at the Committee for Justice, discusses Carpenter v. US, Justice Gorsuch’s dissent, and the future of privacy.
As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speaker."