|
Abstract
| Argument: |
Thursday, February 24, 1972
|
| Decision: |
Monday, June 19, 1972 |
| Issues: |
Criminal Procedure, Search and Seizure, Crime Control Act |
| Categories: |
criminal, national security, presidency, searches and seizures, wiretapping |
|
Advocates
| William T. Gossett |
(Argued the cause for the respondents the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan et al) |
| Arthur Kinoy |
(Argued the cause for the respondents Sinclair et al) |
| Robert Mardian |
(Argued the cause for the United States) |
|
Facts of the Case
Investigating three people it suspected of conspiring to destroy government property and bombing a Central Intelligence Agency office, officials used electronic surveillance to record suspects' conversations. The wiretapping was conducted without a search warrant.
Question
Did the wiretapping violate the Fourth Amendment?
Conclusion
The Court held government officials were obligated to obtain a warrant before beginning electronic surveillance even if domestic security issues were involved. The "inherent vagueness of the domestic security concept" and the potential for abusing it to quell political dissent made the Fourth Amendment protections especially important when the government engaged in spying on its own citizens.
