Nathan Freed Wessler
Role at the time: ACLU attorney who argued Carpenter v. United States
Challenged the characterization
Statement summary
Wessler rejects the claim that using technology removes Fourth Amendment protection.
“The government can no longer claim that the mere act of using technology eliminates the Fourth Amendment’s protections.”
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)Supreme Court Rules Police Need a Warrant to Track CellphonesThe government can no longer claim
The ACLU issued a statement after the Supreme Court ruled in Carpenter. Wessler had argued the case for Carpenter.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Why we used this label
Relative to the government's claim that using technology removes Fourth Amendment protection, Wessler expressly rejects that legal characterization. He welcomes the warrant requirement for historical cellphone location records.