Academic Integrity: tutoring, explanations, and feedback — we don’t complete graded work or submit on a student’s behalf.

In Case 7.3 Kyllo v. United States p 151-152 we explore the application and limi

ID: 354311 • Letter: I

Question

In Case 7.3 Kyllo v. United States p 151-152 we explore the application and limits of the Fourth Amendment. Citizens are protected in their homes from unwarranted (unreasonable) searches by law or government. Privacy rights are severely tested now by advances in technology that monitors phones and internet and watch where we come and go for security purposes. Kyllo was growing marijuana in his house with heat lamps and lights that increased thermal radiation and elevated house temperatures. Police agents scanned his house with a thermal imager from across the street and in the back-but they did not obtain a warrant for this surveillance. From these thermal readings, police were led to obtain a search warrant and arrest Kyllo for growing pot. 31 You be the judge. Was the court correct in defining the thermal imaging of Kyllo's house as a police search that was unreasonable? Do our privacy rights under the 4th amendment need to be adjusted in light of technical advances that blur definition of surveillance and searches?

Explanation / Answer

The 4th amendment states that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. If a device, not generally used, is used to explore the details of a home that would be undetected and unknowable without physical inspection is considered as a search under 4th amendment and is unreasonable without a warrant. The thermal imaging used is not a device used for general public use, as well as there was no warrant used to search Kyllo’s house using thermal imaging device. So, the court was absolutely right in defining thermal imaging of Kyllo’s house as a search that was unreasonable.

The way technology is advancing; the Fourth amendment needs to increase its scope to effectively protect our privacy rights. More checks and balances must be applied to avoid any illegal search and surveillances of private lives of US citizens.