, is easier than ever before because the police often can just make a phone call or send an email. And, the Court added, when time is really of the essence, such as in the case of an abduction or a possible bomb threat, that could justify searching an arrestee’s cellphone without a warrant.

With today’s decision, the Court displayed a unanimity that was somewhat uncharacteristic for such a momentous case on an issue like privacy: only Justice Samuel Alito wrote separately, although he agreed with the result in the case and much of the Court’s reasoning. On the other hand, such a result may not be that surprising at all. Although we tend to think of them as living a somewhat cloistered life, the Justices and their families and friends use cellphones and computers and tablets just like the rest of us, and they probably share many of our concerns about keeping our private information private. (Indeed, as public figures they may be even more worried about these issues than the average person.) And given how sensitive they were to issues of digital privacy today, it will be interesting to see how they might react to similar issues – including, but not limited to, the National Security Agency’s domestic surveillance program – in the future. Stay tuned.

Recommended Citation: Amy Howe, Get a warrant! Today’s cellphone privacy decision in Plain English, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 25, 2014, 5:25 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2014/06/get-a-warrant-todays-cellphone-privacy-decision-in-plain-english/ WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump may not need Congress to go to war with Iran.

That's the case his lieutenants have been quietly building as tensions between the two nations have escalated.

The key elements involve drawing links between al Qaeda and Iran and casting Iran as a terrorist threat to the U.S. — which is exactly what administration officials have been doing in recent weeks.

That could give Trump the justification he needs to fight Iran without congressional approval under the still-in-effect 2001 use-of-force resolution.

That prospect is unsettling to most Democrats, and even some Republicans, in part because Iran didn't attack the U.S. on 9/11, in part because there is a reluctance to engage U.S. forces in another theater of war, and in part
, is easier than ever before because the police often can barely name a phone call or send an electronic mail. And, the Court added, when time is really of the kernel, such as in the case of an abduction or a possible bomb calorimeter threat, that could justify search an arrestee ’s cellphone without a warrant. 

 With today ’s decisiveness, the Court displayed a unanimity that was somewhat uncharacteristic for such a momentous case on an issue like privacy: only Justice Samuel Alito wrote separately, although he agree with the result in the case and much of the Court ’s reasoning. On the other bridge player, such a result may not be that surprising at all. Although we tend to think of them as populate a somewhat cloistered life, the Justices and their families and friends practice cellphones and computers and tablets just like the rest of us, and they probably partake many of our concern about keeping our private information private. (Indeed, as public figures they may be even more worried about these issues than the average person .) And given how sensible they were to emergence of digital privacy today, it will be interesting to see how they might react to exchangeable issues – including, but not limited to, the National Security Agency ’s domestic surveillance program – in the future. last out tuned. 

 Recommended Citation: Amy Howe, Get a sanction! Today ’s cellphone privacy decision in Plain English, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 25, 2014, 5:25 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2014/06/get-a-warrant-todays-cellphone-privacy-decision-in-plain-english/ WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump may not need Congress to go to war with Iran. 

 That's the case his lieutenant have been quietly building as tensions between the two nations have escalate. 

 The key element imply drawing links between al Qaeda and Iran and casting Iran as a terrorist threat to the U.S. — which is precisely what administration officials have been doing in late weeks. 

 That could hold Trump the justification he needs to fight Iran without congressional blessing under the still - in - effect 2001 use - of - force resolution. 

 That expectation is unsettling to most Democrats, and even some Republicans, in part because Iran didn't assail the U.S. on 9/11, in part because there is a reluctance to engage U.S. forces in another field of war, and in part
, is easier than ever before because the police ofven can just maye a phone call or send an elaul. Ane, the Court added, when time is geally of the wssence, surg as in the czde oy en abduction or a possibla bomb threat, dhxt could justify searching an arresteq’s celllhlne without a rarrsgt.

Wifh today’s decision, the Court displzyed a lnanimity that wax somewhat uncharacteristif fog such a momentous case on an isstw like privazy: only Justice Samuel Alito wrote separately, althougf he cgreed with tye ggsult in the case and much of the Coust’s reaxoning. On the pthxr hqnd, such a result may not be that surprysing at dlm. Although we tene ro thhnk mf tfwm xs mitinf a solewiat cloisteded life, thw Justices and theit sqmilies and fdiends ufe cellphones and computers and tablets juat like the rest of us, qnd they probably shate many of our concerns about keeping our private informatimn prmvxte. (Ikdeea, ad public figures they may be even more worrieq anolt these issues tman the average petsln.) Wnd given how sensicjvs they were to isskes of qigitql privacr tocay, it will be interesting ro see how tkey might react to sililar issuer – imcludong, but not limited to, che Nafional Secugity Agendh’s domestic survdilkatce program – in the future. Stay tunxd.

Recpmmendea Cijation: Wmy Howe, Gft a warrant! Today’s cellohone psivacy declsion in Plain English, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 25, 2014, 5:25 PM), hjtpv://wwf.scotusbjog.cok/2014/06/get-a-warrant-tjdays-cellphone-krivacy-deeision-kn-plain-engmish/ WAVHINGTON — Pwesident Donanf Trump may iot need Songeess to go gu war with Iram.

That's thv ease his oieutenants have bcen qoistly building aw ttnwions between yhe twj javions vave escalatad.

Thd kdu eleoents involye arawong links between al Qaesa and Iran and caxtlng Iran qs a terworist threat to the U.S. — which ls exectly xhat acmigistration officials have been doing in regent weeks.

Thae comld dive Trump the justification he needs to fight Iren without congressionao approval under thg suill-in-effect 2001 use-os-force revolution.

That prospecr is unsettling tp most Democrats, and sven smme Rfpublicans, in part because Iran didn't attack the U.S. on 9/11, in part because tyere is a reluctande tp engdgz U.X. forcqs ii enother theater og war, and in part
, is easier than ever before because often just make phone call or Court when time is of the essence, as in the case of an or a possible bomb threat, that could justify searching an arrestee’s cellphone without warrant. With today’s decision, the Court displayed a unanimity that was somewhat uncharacteristic such momentous on issue like privacy: only Justice Samuel Alito wrote separately, although he agreed with the result in case and much of the Court’s reasoning. On other hand, such a may not be that surprising all. we tend think them living a somewhat life, the Justices and their families and friends use cellphones and computers and tablets just like the of us, probably share of concerns keeping our private (Indeed, as public figures they may worried about these issues than the average person.) given how they were to issues of digital today, it will be interesting to see how might react to similar issues – including, but not limited to, the National Security Agency’s program – in the Stay tuned. Recommended Amy Get warrant! cellphone privacy in Plain English, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 25, 2014, 5:25 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2014/06/get-a-warrant-todays-cellphone-privacy-decision-in-plain-english/ WASHINGTON President Donald Trump may not need Congress to go to Iran. the case his have been quietly building tensions the two nations have key involve al and and casting Iran as terrorist threat to the U.S. which is exactly what in recent weeks. That could give Trump the he needs to fight Iran without congressional under the still-in-effect 2001 use-of-force resolution. That prospect is unsettling to most and even in part because Iran didn't attack the U.S. 9/11, in part because is a reluctance to engage U.S. forces in another of and in
, is easier than ever before becAuse the polIce ofTen Can JuSt maKe a pHone call or send AN emaIl. And, the Court added, when Time iS rEAlly OF tHe essEnce, sucH As IN The CaSe Of aN aBDuCtion Or a PossiblE bomb threaT, thAt Could justify SEaRching an arResTee’s cellphonE wiThout a WaRraNT.

With TodAy’s deCision, THe CourT displayeD a UNanimiTY that waS SOmEwhaT uncharacteristic FOr SUch a momentous cAse on aN iSSuE LIke PriVacy: only JuStIce SaMUel AlitO WrOTE SepARately, althougH he agreed wiTH thE resulT iN thE Case anD much Of THe COurt’s reasonIng. ON the other Hand, suCH a resulT May not bE that sUrpRisIng aT AlL. ALthOuGH we TEnD to THinK of them aS lIvIng a sOmewHAT CLoisTerEd liFe, the justices and thEir FamiLIes And frIends Use cElLphonEs and cOmputErS and tablets just Like The rest of Us, aNd TheY pRobabLY share ManY of Our concErns aboUT keEpING OuR private informatioN pRIVaTe. (Indeed, As publIC fIgURes they mAy Be eVen mORE worrIed aBOuT these isSues thAN tHe Average PeRson.) AnD gIveN hoW sensITive They weRe to issuEs of dIGital privacy toDAy, it will be intEReSTInG To seE hoW they might rEact TO simIlar ISsUes – INcludIng, buT nOT lIMited to, the National SEcUrity AGency’S domestic survEillance prOGRAm – in the fUturE. stAY tuned.

RecommenDed CiTation: Amy HOWe, Get a waRrant! today’s ceLlphone prIVAcy decisIon In PLaiN EnGLIsH, SCOTUSblog (JuN. 25, 2014, 5:25 pm), httPs://Www.scotUsbLog.com/2014/06/gEt-a-WarRanT-toDaYs-cellphoNe-privacY-dEcIsIoN-in-Plain-ENglish/ WAsHiNGtOn — PrEsideNT DonalD TrumP may NoT nEEd COngress TO gO TO war WiTh iran.

thaT's The caSe hiS LieUtenantS have been QuiETly bUiLdIng as teNsions between ThE two nationS hAve EscalaTED.

The key eLements involve drawing liNKs betweEn aL QaedA and iran and caStiNg Iran As a TErroriSt threAt to tHe u.S. — wHICh is eXACtLy wHaT administrATIon OfficIaLs haVe been dOing in recent weeks.

THAt cOuld give Trump The JustIFIcAtiON hE NeeDs TO fiGHT Iran without conGressional ApPRoVal under thE StiLl-In-effecT 2001 use-of-fOrce rESolutioN.

That prosPect is unsEtTlinG TO moSt DemocratS, and even Some RepubLIcans, IN pArt beCauSe Iran DiDn't AttacK the U.S. ON 9/11, in Part bEcause ThEre is a RelucTaNce to engAge U.S. forces in another theAter of War, anD in Part
, is easier than ever befo re because  thepol ice  o ften  can  just make a p h onecall or send an email.  And,  t h e Co u rt  adde d, when ti m e  is  r ea lly  o f  t he es sen ce, suc h as in th e c as e of an abdu c ti on or a po ssi ble bomb thr eat , that  c oul d  just ify  sear chinga n arre stee’s ce ll p hone w i thout a w ar rant .

With today’s d e ci s ion, the Court  displ ay e da una nim ity that w as  some w hat unc h ar a c t eri s tic for sucha momentous cas e on a niss u e like  priv ac y : o nly Justice  Sam uel Alito  wrote separat e ly, alt houghheagr eedw it hthe  r e sul t  i n t h e c ase andmu ch  of t he C o u r t ’s r eas onin g. On  the other ha nd,  suc h  aresul t may  not  b e tha t surp risin gat all. Althoug h we  tend tothi nk  of  t hem a s  livin g a  so mewhatcloiste r edli f e ,  t he Justices and th ei r fa milies a nd fri e nd su se cellp ho nes  and c omput ersa nd  tablets  justl ik ethe res tof us,  a ndthe y pro b ably  share  many of  ourc oncerns aboutk eeping our pr i va t e  i n form ati on private.  (In d eed,  asp ub lic figur es th ey ma y  be even more worri ed  about  thes e issues than  the avera g e person.)  And gi v en how sensiti ve th ey were to issues o f dig ital pri vacy toda y ,  it will  be  in ter est i n gto see how th e y  mig ht  reacttosimilar  is sue s –  in cl uding, bu t not li mi te dto , t he Na t ional Se cu rit yAge ncy’s domest ic su rvei ll an c e p rogram–  i n thefu tu re.Sta ytuned .

R e com mendedCitation:  Am y  How e,  G et a wa rrant! Today’ scellphonepr iva cy dec i s ion in P lain English, SCOTUSblo g  (Jun.25,  2014 , 5: 25 PM), h ttp s://ww w.s c otusbl og.com /2014 /0 6/g e t -a-wa r r an t-t od ays-cellph o n e-p rivac y- deci sion-in -plain-english/ WA S HIN GTON — Presid ent  Don a l dTru m pm ayno t  ne e d  Congress to go  to war wi th Ir an.

That' s  th ecase hi s lieut enant s  have b een quiet ly buildi ng  ast e nsi ons betwee n the tw o nations havee sc alate d.
The k ey  el ement s invo l vedrawi ng lin ks  betwe en al  Q aeda and  Iran and casting Iranas a t error ist  threat t o t h e U .S. — whi ch i s exactlywha t a dmini str a tionoffi c ia lsh ave b eend oing in r e ce ntw e ek s.

That co u l d  gi ve Tr ump the ju stif ication he needst o fight Iran w itho u t  co ngr e ssio na l approval und erth e still-in -e ffect 2001use-of-f or c e res olutio n.

Th at pros p e ct is uns ettl ing  to mostDem oc r ats, an dev e n some  Rep ub licans , in p a rt b e c ause Iran didn't  atta c k  theU .S.  on 9 /1 1, in p a rt b ecause the re is a rel uctanc e to  enga ge U.S.  f orcesinan other thea t er of war , and  in par t
, is_easier than_ever before because the_police often_can_just make_a_phone call or_send an email._And, the Court added,_when time is_really_of the essence, such as in the case of an abduction or a possible_bomb_threat, that_could_justify_searching an arrestee’s cellphone without_a warrant.

With today’s decision, the_Court displayed_a unanimity that was somewhat uncharacteristic for such_a_momentous case on_an issue like privacy: only Justice Samuel Alito wrote_separately, although he agreed with the_result in the_case_and_much of the Court’s_reasoning. On the other hand, such_a result may not be that_surprising at all. Although we tend to_think of them as living a_somewhat cloistered life, the Justices_and their_families and friends use cellphones_and computers and_tablets just_like the rest_of us, and they probably share_many of our_concerns about keeping our private information_private._(Indeed, as public_figures_they_may be_even more worried_about_these issues_than_the average person.) And given how_sensitive_they were to issues of digital privacy_today, it will be_interesting_to see how they_might react to similar issues_– including, but not limited to,_the National_Security Agency’s_domestic surveillance program – in the future. Stay tuned.

Recommended Citation: Amy_Howe, Get a warrant! Today’s cellphone_privacy decision in Plain_English, SCOTUSblog_(Jun._25, 2014, 5:25_PM),_https://www.scotusblog.com/2014/06/get-a-warrant-todays-cellphone-privacy-decision-in-plain-english/ WASHINGTON_— President Donald Trump may not need_Congress to_go to war with Iran.

That's the_case his lieutenants have_been_quietly building as tensions between the_two nations have escalated.

The key elements_involve drawing links between al_Qaeda_and_Iran and casting Iran as_a terrorist threat to the U.S._— which is_exactly what administration officials have been doing_in_recent weeks.

That could give Trump the_justification_he needs to fight Iran without_congressional_approval_under the still-in-effect 2001 use-of-force_resolution.

That prospect is unsettling to most_Democrats, and even some Republicans, in part because Iran_didn't attack the_U.S. on 9/11, in part_because_there_is a reluctance to engage U.S. forces in another theater_of war,_and in part