Statements (202)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
gptkb:legal_case |
| gptkbp:addressed |
Data privacy
|
| gptkbp:affects |
Public perception of privacy
|
| gptkbp:affects_legislation |
Privacy laws
|
| gptkbp:amici_curiae |
Various privacy advocacy groups
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
November 29, 2017
|
| gptkbp:argument_duration |
1 hour
|
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Reviewed by legal scholars
Continues to be cited in legal arguments Broader implications for technology and privacy Evaluated implications for future technology Examined balance between privacy and security Used in law schools for teaching Fourth Amendment Debate over judicial interpretation of the Fourth Amendment Balancing privacy and security concerns Example of modern privacy challenges Legal scholars and practitioners' analysis Reevaluation of privacy laws in the digital age Continued discussions on surveillance and privacy rights |
| gptkbp:case_number |
Available in legal databases
16-402 Involved multiple appeals Appealed from Sixth Circuit Court Supreme Court opinion documents |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
5-4 ruling
Reversed lower court decision Reversed lower court ruling Reinforced Fourth Amendment protections Significant for civil liberties Majority opinion emphasized privacy Strengthened privacy protections Affected law enforcement data collection Warrant requirement established Influenced future court rulings on digital privacy Shaped public policy on data privacy Warrantless access to historical cell site location information unconstitutional Expanded privacy protections Majority opinion emphasized privacy concerns Reevaluation of surveillance practices Significant for digital age privacy rights. |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Landmark decision
Landmark decision on digital privacy Landmark ruling on digital privacy |
| gptkbp:case_types |
Criminal law
Criminal case Privacy vs. law enforcement needs |
| gptkbp:consequences |
privacy rights
Strengthened Fourth Amendment protections digital data collection Potential changes to surveillance laws |
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Washington,_D._C.
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States Federal |
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:2018
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States June 22, 2018 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Alito
gptkb:Justice_Neil_Gorsuch gptkb:Justice_John_Roberts gptkb:Justice_Thomas gptkb:Justice_Samuel_Alito gptkb:Justice_Gorsuch gptkb:Justice_Clarence_Thomas Technological advancements data privacy public interest technological advancements individual rights civil liberties data collection practices data retention policies social norms due process balance of power public trust government transparency rights of the accused search and seizure judicial oversight government overreach individual autonomy constitutional interpretation judicial restraint legislative intent law enforcement accountability constitutional protections Fourth Amendment interpretation technological implications privacy vs. security expectation of privacy constitutional safeguards Impact on law enforcement Dissent argued for law enforcement needs historical cell site data law enforcement needs Concerns over privacy implications Historical context of the Fourth Amendment Potential for increased crime Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh privacy expectations government surveillance concerns privacy rights expansion rights of privacy |
| gptkbp:economic_policy |
Influenced policy on digital data access
Balancing privacy and security |
| gptkbp:effective_date |
gptkb:2018
June 22, 2018 |
| gptkbp:election |
5-4
|
| gptkbp:has_implications_for |
Government surveillance practices
Fourth Amendment jurisprudence Fourth Amendment interpretation |
| gptkbp:historical_context |
Rise of digital technology
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Carpenter v. United States
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Law enforcement practices
Law enforcement procedures |
| gptkbp:influenced_by |
Technological advancements
|
| gptkbp:influences |
Future cases on privacy
|
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
Timothy Carpenter and FBI
|
| gptkbp:involved_technology |
Cell phone tracking
Cellular network data |
| gptkbp:involves |
gptkb:Fourth_Amendment
|
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
138 S. Ct. 2206
585 U. S. 2018 |
| gptkbp:is_debated_in |
Cell site location information
|
| gptkbp:is_standardized_by |
Reasonable expectation of privacy
|
| gptkbp:issues |
Cell Site Location Information
|
| gptkbp:judicial_consensus |
Divided opinions among justices
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Constitutional interpretation
Supreme Court review of lower court ruling Constitutionality of surveillance |
| gptkbp:jurisdiction |
gptkb:United_States_federal_law
|
| gptkbp:legacy |
Influence on future legal standards for technology and privacy
|
| gptkbp:legal_context |
Cell phone tracking
Digital privacy rights Fourth Amendment jurisprudence |
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
gptkb:Sixth_Circuit_Court_of_Appeals
Influence on future cases Evolving standards of privacy Established guidelines for law enforcement Guidance for law enforcement Constitutional originalism vs. living constitution Reevaluation of surveillance laws Set a standard for digital privacy |
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
Expectation of privacy
Fourth Amendment rights Ongoing discussions on privacy rights Historical context of privacy Ongoing discussions about privacy rights |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
Strengthened privacy rights
reversed lower court decision Strengthened Fourth Amendment protections Significant ruling on privacy rights |
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
Reasonable expectation of privacy
|
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
gptkb:ACLU
Impact on law enforcement access to data |
| gptkbp:legislation |
gptkb:Stored_Communications_Act
Expectation of privacy |
| gptkbp:lower_court_decision |
affirmed conviction
|
| gptkbp:material |
Timothy Carpenter's conviction for robbery
Involves warrantless tracking of cell phone data |
| gptkbp:outcome |
Warrant required for cell phone location data
|
| gptkbp:party |
gptkb:United_States_Government
gptkb:Timothy_Carpenter |
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:Riley_v._California
gptkb:Katz_v._United_States gptkb:United_States_v._Jones cell phone location data Privacy expectations in digital data Privacy in digital age Influence on future rulings Expectation of privacy in cell phone data Influenced future digital privacy cases Established standards for digital data access Future digital privacy cases |
| gptkbp:propulsion |
gptkb:United_States
gptkb:Timothy_Carpenter |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_Roberts
gptkb:Chief_Justice_John_Roberts gptkb:Justice_John_Paul_Stevens gptkb:Justice_Sotomayor gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States gptkb:Justice_Kagan gptkb:Justice_Kennedy gptkb:Justice_Breyer Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| gptkbp:public_reaction |
Significant media coverage
Debate on privacy rights |
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:Riley_v._California
gptkb:United_States_v._Jones Cases involving digital data privacy |
| gptkbp:related_statute |
gptkb:Stored_Communications_Act
|
| gptkbp:scholarly_analysis |
Impact on future cases
Extensive legal commentary |
| gptkbp:significance |
Privacy rights in digital age
Digital privacy rights |
| gptkbp:was_a_demonstration_of |
Cell site location information
|
| gptkbp:year |
gptkb:2018
|
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court |
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
3
|