Calling All Cell Phone Users

Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
The warrantless wiretapping of a public pay phone violates the unreasonable search and seizure protections of the Fourth Amendment.

The brief descriptions of the following cases are provided for students who may wish to further explore the constitutionality of domestic wiretapping.

Olmstead v. United States (1928)
Held that wiretaps are permissible because the Fourth Amendment only prohibits physical intrusion into an area ("trespass doctrine").

Goldman v. United States (1942)
Further defines the "trespass doctrine," holding that audio magnifiers are permissible so long as they are only attached to a wall. They are not permissible if drilled into the wall.

Silverman v. United States (1961)
Established the doctrine of "constitutionally protected area."

Berger v. New York (1967)
Held that a statute authorizing a magistrate to grant a warrant permitting unrestrained eavesdropping of a home was unconstitutional.

Sources:

• http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=389&invol=347, and
• LaFave, Wayne R. "The Forgotten Motto of Obesta Principiss in Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence," Arizona Law Review 28 (1986): 291-310; cited in: Wayne R. LaFave. "Katz v. United States." The Oxford Guide to U.S. Supreme Court Decisions. Kermit Hall, Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. pp. 145-46.