In February of 1965, FBI Special agents placed microphones on the tops of two public telephone booths in Los Angeles frequented by Charles Katz, suspected of wiring illegal gambling wagers to Miami and Boston. A study of the transcripts from these wire taps revealed that Charles Katz was discussing the placing of bets and obtaining gambling information. The coded language that Katz used was easily identified as gambling transactions and the FBI arrested Katz and indicted him on 8 counts. Charles Katz was unaware of these recordings, yet they served as the basis for his conviction. Katz sued the FBI, challenging his conviction, arguing that the evidence was obtained in violation of his Fourth amendment rights which prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court (Katz v. United Sates) where the court discussed the nature of the "right to privacy" and the legal definition of a "search". On December 18, 1967, the court ruled 7-1 in favor of Katz with only Justice Black in dissent. Justice Thurgood Marshall who was nominated by President Johnson just a few months earlier did not participate in the vote. Justice Stewart wrote the majority opinion, explaining that when someone uses telephone booth and shuts the door behind him, he is entitled to assume that his words are not being broadcast to the world. This was very significant, because it made government wiretapping by both state and federal authorities subject to the warrant requirements found in the Fourth amendment.
Just 11 months earlier, on January 10, 1967 while the Katz case was currently in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, President Lyndon Johnson seemed to have already made up his mind and in very strong words sided in favor of Charles Katz. Citing a law review article entitled "The Right to Privacy" written by Justice Louis Brandeis and published in the 1890 Harvard Law Review, Johnson called the right to privacy, the "right most valued by civilized men". Johnson called for the nation to outlaw all wiretapping, both public and private in all cases, except where the security of the nation itself is at risk. In 1967, President Johnson was calling for Congress to enact the Right of Privacy Act of 1967 which would outlaw all wire tapping and prohibit the advertisement, manufacture or distribution of wiretapping devices across state lines. He delivered a more thorough outline of his plan in a special message on Crime a month later, but given the likelihood that Charles Katz was heading to the Supreme Court, one cannot wonder if the President was also speaking directly to the Supreme Court justices when he said ... "we should exercise the full reach of our constitutional powers to outlaw electronic 'bugging' and 'snooping.'"
"We should protect what Justice Brandeis called the "right most valued by civilized men"--the right to privacy. We should outlaw all wiretapping--public and private--wherever and whenever it occurs, except when the security of this Nation itself is at stake--and only then with the strictest governmental safeguards. And we should exercise the full reach of our constitutional powers to outlaw electronic 'bugging' and 'snooping'."A more detailed outline of Johnson's plan was delivered to Congress on February 6, 1967
"THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY
Justice Brandeis called the right of privacy the "right most valued by civilized men."It is the first right denied by any totalitarian system. It is associated in the minds of most Americans with the right to be free of unlawful searches and forced self-incrimination. It is a hallmark of a free society.
I believe we should protect that right against invasion by wiretapping and electronic devices.
We would indeed be indifferent to the command of our heritage if we failed to take effective action to preserve the dignity and privacy of each among us. A new Federal law banning wiretapping and electronic bugging and snooping is essential.
Present laws are clearly inadequate. They create serious uncertainties in their application and leave large loopholes in their coverage. In short, they invite abuse.
I recommend that the Congress enact the Right of Privacy Act of 1967.
Within the full reach of the constitutional powers possessed by the Federal government this law would:
--Outlaw all wiretapping, public and private, wherever and whenever it occurs, as well as all willful invasions of privacy by electronic devices such as radio transmitters and concealed microphones. The only exceptions would cover those instances where the security of the Nation itself is at stake--and then only under the strictest safeguards.
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/369/130/261303/--Prohibit the advertisement, manufacture or distribution in interstate commerce of wiretapping and eavesdrop ping devices."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=28394
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katz_v._United_States
http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/12/katz-v-united-states-the-fourth-amendment-adapts-to-new-technology/
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/273830/charles-katz-v-united-states/
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/107564/katz-v-united-states/
No comments:
Post a Comment