Chatrie v. United States · ¶126

To illustrate this point, imagine that Chatrie spent his free time taking road trips across the United States. And suppose that he entered into a contract with a travel agency, under which the agency would provide him valuable information about places to visit and activities to try as he traveled from place to place. Suppose that the contract, in exchange for these services, authorized the travel agency to maintain a detailed chronicle of Chatrie’s adventures and to use that information to develop its business, expand its offerings, and advertise to prospective customers. If a grand jury had subpoenaed the travel agency for the records of Chatrie’s travels, he would have no basis to object on search-and-seizure grounds. At least through the late 19th century, compelled document-production orders were simply not “searches.” Likewise, until Carpenter, this Court held that the Fourth…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.