United States v. Warshak
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Federal circuit court)
- Decided
- 2010
- Citation
- 631 F.3d 266 (6th Cir. 2010)
- Standard applied
- Fourth Amendment applied to e-mail held by a commercial ISP
What the court held
A subscriber has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of e-mails stored with, or sent or received through, a commercial internet service provider, so obtaining them without a warrant violated the Fourth Amendment; to the extent the Stored Communications Act purports to permit that, it is unconstitutional. The e-mails were nonetheless not suppressed, because the agents relied in good faith on the SCA.
Why
The court distinguished the third-party bank-records line of cases, treating an ISP as the functional equivalent of a post office or telephone company rather than a party to whom the content has been voluntarily disclosed. It acknowledged that a sweeping subscriber agreement might in some cases defeat the expectation, while doubting that would often be so. On remedy, it held the SCA was not so conspicuously unconstitutional as to preclude good-faith reliance, having stood since 1986 without a successful Fourth Amendment challenge.
Our reading — not the court’s words
Why this matters in practice
Warshak is the decision that brought stored e-mail content inside the Fourth Amendment, and in practice it is why providers now insist on a warrant for content even though the statute's text does not always require one. Its good-faith holding is the part practitioners under-read: the constitutional ruling did not help this defendant at all, which is the recurring pattern in this area. The court's own warning is worth keeping — that good faith should not become a perpetual shield, or novel constitutional questions would never be reached.
This paragraph is Legal Cyber Academy’s editorial assessment of the decision’s practical importance. The court said none of it. For what the court actually said, read the opinion.
Additional detail
Tags: e-mail content · Stored Communications Act · good faith · ISP
Cited 378times in CourtListener’s corpus at the time this entry was compiled. Treat it as a rough measure of influence, not of correctness.
Other decisions on fourth amendment and privacy & surveillance
- United States v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 2012Attaching a GPS tracking device to a vehicle and using it to monitor the vehicle's movements constitutes a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Th…
- Riley v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2014Police generally may not search the digital contents of a cell phone seized incident to an arrest without a warrant. The search-incident-to-arrest exception, wh…
- Carpenter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2018The government's acquisition of historical cell-site location information from a wireless carrier is a Fourth Amendment search, and generally requires a warrant…
- In re Application of the United States for Historical Cell Site DataCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2013Court orders authorised by the Stored Communications Act compelling cell-phone service providers to produce subscribers' historical cell-site information are no…
- United States v. GrahamCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2016Sitting en banc, the Fourth Circuit held that a cell-phone user has no reasonable expectation of privacy in historical cell-site location information held by hi…
- United States v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2015Sitting en banc, the Eleventh Circuit held that a court order under § 2703(d) of the Stored Communications Act compelling a telephone company to produce its bus…
Summarised from the opinion as retrieved from CourtListener. Reference material, not legal advice. Back to the repository.