United States v. Jones (2012)

GPTKB entity

Statements (44)
Predicate Object
gptkbp:instanceOf legal case
gptkbp:caseOutcome Strengthened Fourth Amendment protections
Set a precedent for future surveillance cases
gptkbp:caseTypes Criminal law
10-1259
gptkbp:consequences Law enforcement practices regarding surveillance
gptkbp:court Unanimous decision
gptkbp:date November 8, 2011
gptkbp:decidedBy gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
January 23, 2012
gptkbp:effectiveDate January 23, 2012
gptkbp:firstClaim Influenced legislation on surveillance
gptkbp:historical_analysis Widely discussed in legal journals
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label United States v. Jones (2012)
gptkbp:impact Privacy rights in the digital age
gptkbp:judges gptkb:Justice_Samuel_Alito
Scalia,_Kennedy,_Thomas,_Alito,_Sotomayor,_Ginsburg,_Breyer,_Roberts
gptkbp:jurisdiction Federal jurisdiction
gptkbp:legalStatus Reversed lower court decision
Influenced public policy on surveillance practices
Part of a broader discussion on privacy rights
Related to debates on technology and privacy
Fourth_Amendment_rights
Expansion_of_Fourth_Amendment_protections
Jones_was_represented_by_the_ACLU
Informed_judicial_interpretations_of_the_Fourth_Amendment
gptkbp:notableFeature 565 U.S. 400
gptkbp:outcome Warrantless_GPS_tracking_is_a_violation_of_the_Fourth_Amendment
gptkbp:politicalAffiliation gptkb:United_States
gptkb:Antoine_Jones
gptkbp:politicalParty gptkb:Justice_Antonin_Scalia
gptkbp:precedent GPS tracking requires a warrant
Subsequent cases on surveillance
gptkbp:publicAccess Mixed reactions from civil liberties groups
Concerns from law enforcement agencies
Support from privacy advocates
gptkbp:relatedPatent gptkb:Kyllo_v._United_States
gptkb:Riley_v._California
gptkb:United_States_v._Carpenter
gptkb:United_States_v._Warshak
Search and seizure
Expectation of privacy
Technological surveillance
gptkbp:significance First_Supreme_Court_case_addressing_GPS_tracking