The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution has long protected the people of the United States from unreasonable searches and seizures. However, this protection does not extend to all searches and seizures, only to those that are deemed unreasonable under the law. The Supreme Court has traditionally considered warrantless searches presumptively unreasonable. The present digital age has made the application of the Fourth Amendment increasingly problematic, as the judiciary is constantly called upon to redefine what is and is not reasonable. Most recently, the judiciary has been called upon to determine whether the warrantless procurement of cell-site location information (“CSLI”) violates the protections of the Fourth Amendment.
Most courts—specifically the Third, Fifth, and Eleventh Circuits—have concluded that the warrantless procurement of CSLI is not per se unconstitutional. On August 5, 2015, in United States v. Graham, the Fourth Circuit broke away from its sister circuits and held that the warrantless procurement of CSLI is unconstitutional. However, since the publication of this Note, the Fourth Circuit vacated this decision pending a rehearing en banc, tentatively scheduled for oral argument during the court’s March 22–25, 2016, oral argument session. This Note argues that the full Fourth Circuit should uphold the three-judge panel’s decision in Graham and conclude that the warrantless procurement of CSLI is unconstitutional.
