We have two stories that might interest you this week:
First, on Monday, the Supreme Court issued a key Fourth Amendment decision, holding that attaching a GPS tracking device to a vehicle constitutes a search and that authorities need a warrant to perform such a search in most cases. What implications do you think this case will have for the future? In what other ways do you think current and evolving technology will alter what constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment? You can read the full decision here.
Second, in local news, a Lake County, Indiana judge made an example out of a juror who did not return for jury duty. After the juror did not follow the judge’s instructions and return to court as he was supposed to, the judge forced him to stand in front of the courthouse with a sign that said he failed to appear. Do you approve of this judge’s actions? Or are they too extreme?
Leave us a comment and share your thoughts!