Policymakers — state and federal, legislative and judicial — have expressed their interest in updating the laws regarding electronic surveillance. This interest is motivated by several recent trends. First, law enforcement surveillance has traditionally been limited as much by practical considerations, including the costs and technical difficulty of obtaining evidence, as legal ones. However, technological innovations have undermined these traditional practical protections, raising questions about the adequacy of the legal protections that remain. Second, law enforcement agencies are no longer the only entities collecting information about individuals. A wide variety of commercial entities now collect information about their customers, which law enforcement can access with only minimal legal protections. However, attempts to update electronic surveillance laws are made more difficult by the fact that very little is currently known about how law enforcement officers use electronic surveillance and commercial information requests. This dissertation presents the results of three studies that investigate how law enforcement uses electronic surveillance.
Table of Contents
Does Rejection of the Third Party Doctrine Change Use of Electronic Surveillance? Evidence from the Wiretap Reports
Reconsidering Law Enforcement Use of Technological Search and Seizure: Dollars and Sense
The Gilded Age of Electronic Surveillance
Bibliography, Does Rejection of the Third Party Doctrine Change Use of Electronic Surveillance?
Description of State Supreme Court Cases Affirming or Rejecting the Third-Party Doctrine
Additional Comparison of Intercept Trends
Results of Sensitivity Analyses
References, Reconsidering Law Enforcement Use of Technological Search and Seizure
Full List of Considerations for Using Electronic Surveillance and Commercial Requests