The following podcast contains advertising.

To access an ad-free version of the Lawfair Podcast,

become a material supporter of Lawfair at Patreon.com slash Lawfair. That's Patreon.com

slash Lawfair. Also check out Lawfair's other podcast offerings, rational security, 2024.

Matthew Toxin recently argued in the Lawfare piece that a case heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals

for the Fourth Circuit could undermine the Fourth Amendment protections for location data.

After a geofence warrant served to Google was deemed to be unconstitutional, the government

asserted in the Fourth Circuit oral argument that because the users of Google's location history program voluntarily

disclose their data, it is not protected by the Fourth Amendment.

For today's episode, I chose an episode from November 29th, 2017.

In the episode, Benjamin Wittis sat down with Orrin Kerr

to discuss the oral arguments heard before the Supreme Court in Carpenter of the United States,

the last major Fourth Amendment case that asked whether a warrant is necessary

before law enforcement can obtain cell site data identifying a suspect's phone

location from a service provider. They discussed the oral arguments, the details of the case, and more. I'm Benjamin Wittis and this is the Law Fair Podcast, November 29th, 2017.

The Supreme Court this morning heard oral arguments in Carpenter v. United States, the latest blockbuster Fourth Amendment case to raise questions

about what privacy means in the digital age. The argument was a bit of a surprise

across a lot of different axes and we're going to talk about

them all. It's about cell sites, it's about privacy, it's about will the Supreme Court

revisit the third-party doctrine and if so what the heck will it replace it with

Oren Kerr is with me here at the Brookings Institution he is as lawfare readers well

know extraordinarily distinguished Fourth Amendment scholar

...