Can a business violate our 4th amendment rights? I’m not convinced.
***********************************************************
That’s an interesting question. Is it legal for a peeping Tom to peer in your bedroom window? Maybe take pictures? Come inside your house and search your papers/mail?
Is it legal for a Business to do what is illegal for a person to do?
What if the business was set up as a front for the government to spy on people, their correspondence, their purchases, even to see and hear what is going on in their house? Would that be a violation of the 4th?
I have more questions than answers, but my gut tells me that on many levels this is wrong, and at least a violation of the spirit of the 4th amendment. YMMV
I think the answer would be in an “abrogation of civil rights under color of...” type of tort.
My mileage matches yours perfectly.
You should be in the Senate asking these questions.
Side note: I think we need some laws about “terms of service” agreements. They need to be short and very clear. People need to know what they’re signing up to. They need to be readable and understandable by an average person. They should not require a law degree to interpret. I think should apply to MOST contracts.
Why should it take 5 pages of legal gibberish for me to buy your house? You are selling. I am buying. Here’s the price. That should be upfront. Then, ok, maybe here’s what conveys and what doesn’t. Here’s what’s guaranteed and what isn’t. Those could be SIMPLE lists. Same for any other considerations. Burying things in page after page of gibberish should not be used as a technique for ripping off one party to the contract.
and 3A too...
“Nevertheless, the amendment has some modern implications. It suggests the individual’s right of domestic privacy—that people are protected from governmental intrusion into their homes; and it is the only part of the Constitution that deals directly with the relationship between the rights of individuals and the military in both peace and war—rights that emphasize the importance of civilian control over the armed forces. Some legal scholars have even begun to argue that the amendment might be applied to the government’s response to terror attacks and natural disasters, and to issues involving eminent domain and the militarization of the police.”
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-iii