Lawfare Senior Editor Kate Klonick speaks with former Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben; lecturer in law at Stanford, Richard Salgado; and attorney Adam Unikowsky, to discuss the geofencing Fourth Amendment case that was heard Monday, April 27 in the Supreme Court, Chatrie v. United States.
They discuss the background of the case with their unique perspectives, starting with Unikowsky's framing of the case for his client, Chatrie, and his thoughts on the arguments he made in his defense when he argued the case before the Court on Monday. Salgado, who worked for Google for years answering such warrants and co-authored the technologist amicus brief, discusses how the Court seemed to be handling the sophistication of the technology issues. Dreeben, who argued Carpenter, the Fourth Amendment technology case seen as the precursor to Chatrie, frames up the stakes of the Fourth Amendment issues. They debate the values of various technology metaphors, the long term future of the third party doctrine, and what the Justices seem most concerned with coming out of the arguments on Monday.
","author_name":"The Lawfare Institute"}