Chatrie v. United States · ¶36
That purpose is central to decisions about whether a Fourth Amendment “search” has occurred. Our early search doctrine focused on whether law enforcement officials “obtain[ed] information by physically intruding”—that is, trespassing—on private property. United States v. Jones, 565 U. S. 400, 406–407, n. 3 (2012); see id., at 404– 405. But the Court in Katz v. United States, 389 U. S. 347, 351 (1967), recognized that “the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places.” And so we have long held that “property rights are not the sole measure” of a constitutional violation; the Fourth Amendment “protect[s] certain expectations of privacy as well.” Soldal v. Cook County, 506 U. S. 56, 64 (1992); Carpenter, 585 U. S., at 304. “When an individual seeks to preserve something as private and his expectation of privacy is one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable,” then governmental…Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.