The Supremes have consistently held from the 1920s to the present that the radio-waves belong to the public and the public has the freedom to listen. Public radio-waves do not belong to the person using them. Nobody has a reasonable expectation of privacy. That covers passive radar detectors that listen to the police radar (But not necessarily active ones that send false signals back to the police.) It covers cell-phones like that of the politician visiting Florida and heard on a Radio Shack scanner. That covers phone calls on relayed on micro-wave and bouncing off satellites. Should that Supreme Court precedent be overturned?
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated
Is it unreasonable to eavesdrop on a known member of Al Kaida? A suspected member of Al Kaida? It is the job of Congress to define what is reasonable and what is unreasonable. That should be done by a law that automatically sunsets every 10 years. Congress is derelict in its duty in not defining what is reasonable and what is unreasonable.
and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Again, it is the job of Congress to define probable cause. Congress is derelict in its duty.
Note that there is no prohibition against reasonable searches. Thus the police do road checks for drunk drivers and people not wearing their seatbelts. The courts have determined those checks to be reasonable and thus do not need probable cause. I do not think they are reasonable. But I've been over-ruled.
Are you a Judge Alito fan? He states clearly that there is a Right to Privacy in the Consitution, when he was being probed on abortion. Just curious. Blackbird.