The Fourth Amendment Isn’t in Jeopardy
A bill headed for a House vote would harm U.S. intelligence and law enforcement with little impact on privacy.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
April 16, 2024 5:34 pm ET
There is no shortage of bad ideas in Congress, and too many have a chance to become law these days. An example is the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, which would prohibit the U.S. government from buying digital information that would remain available to the likes of China and Russia.
The bill, scheduled for a House vote on Wednesday, would ban the government from buying information on Americans from data brokers. This would include many things in the cloud of digital exhaust most Americans leave behind online, from information on the websites they visit to credit-card information, health information and political opinions.
Our libertarian friends fret that letting the government buy data infringes on the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee against unreasonable searches. But the Supreme Court held in U.S. v Miller (1976) that “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.” The Court updated Fourth Amendment law on tracking cellphone location data in Carpenter v. U.S. (2018), but the Not For Sale Act goes much further.
The Justice Department says the bill, sponsored by Rep. Warren Davidson (R., Ohio), would limit the ability of U.S. law enforcement to seek information online that often helps solve federal crimes, including hacks and other malicious digital acts. The bill also bans the purchase of records on Americans’ location information, a change that Justice says would hinder the ability to track missing children, hunt fugitives and investigate criminal networks.
The bill would force U.S. intelligence officials to avoid data that could include information on an American. That’s a burden on tools the Defense Department uses to protect foreign military bases and troops abroad.
In a letter to Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and ranking Democrat Jerrold Nadler in December 2023, the Fraternal Order of Police wrote that banning the use of digital information would end law enforcement’s access to “tools that generate leads into crucial and often complex cases.” The National Sheriffs Association says the proposal “empowers the cartels.”
The bill’s co-sponsors include voices on the extremes of both parties, including Rep. Andy Biggs (R., Ariz.) and Democrats Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.) and Mr. Nadler. Let’s hope the sensible center prevails on this one.
