Katz Has Only One Step: The Irrelevance of Subjective Expectations
Orin S. Kerr
George Washington University - Law School
June 11, 2014
University of Chicago Law Review, Forthcoming
GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2014-43
GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2014-43
This Article argues that the “subjective expectation of privacy” test is a phantom doctrine. The test exists on paper but has no impact on case outcomes. An empirical study of cases decided in 2012 indicates that majority of judicial opinions applying Katz do not even mention the subjective expectations test; opinions that mention the test usually do not apply it; and when courts apply it, the test makes no difference to the results.
The subjective test acts as a phantom doctrine because of an overlooked doctrinal shift. A close reading of Justice Harlan’s Katz concurrence suggests that it was originally intended to restate the holdings of the Supreme Court’s caselaw on invited exposure. Under those cases, an individual waived Fourth Amendment rights by inviting others to observe their protected Fourth Amendment spaces. In later cases, however, the Supreme Court misunderstood this original design and recast those holdings as part of the objective prong of the test instead of the subjective test. This doctrinal shift quietly eliminated the role of the subjective test. The Supreme Court should abolish the subjective expectations test to clarify and simplify Fourth Amendment law.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 26
Keywords: Fourth Amendment, Katz, expectation of privacy
JEL Classification: K14, K42Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: June 13, 2014 ; Last revised: August 5, 2014
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.297 seconds