In 2017, ATF agents placed a surveillance camera on a pole across the street from Daphne Moore’s home in Massachusetts. They suspected Moore’s daughter of dealing drugs and guns.They watched the house for eight months until they obtained enough evidence to get a warrant. The warrant led to a prosecution. Moore and her daughter moved to suppress the evidence. The district court granted this motion but the First Circuit later reversed.

Now, Moore and her daughter are asking the Supreme Court to decide “[w]hether long-term police use of a surveillance camera targeted at a person’s home and curtilage is a Fourth Amendment search.” A nearly identical certiorari petition arose from the Seventh Circuit a year ago but was denied.

The Federalist Society covered that petition on a previous teleforum featuring a debate about whether the word “search” in the Fourth Amendment should be interpreted in accord with the reasonable-expectation-of-privacy test or in accord with the word’s plain meaning.

Join Institute for Justice Senior Attorney, Robert Frommer, for a litigation update on this interesting Fourth Amendment question and the petition before the Court. The Institute for Justice filed an amicus brief urging the court to grant the petition for certiorari.

— Robert Frommer, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
— Moderator: Adam Griffin, Law Clerk, US District Courts

Subscribe to The Federalist Society's Teleforum in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.