> On 31 Mar 2000, Frog forwarded: > > > Such a surveillance scheme is allowable, argued SEC assistant > > general counsel George C. Browne, because "the Constitution doesn't > > give people the right to use the Internet to commit fraud." Mr. Choate responded: > No, it doesn't. It also doesn't give you the authority to search people > without probable cause obtained PRIOR to the search. > > What I don't understand is why all these people who obviously failed basic > American History and Politics opt to go to work for the government or > become lawyers. Actually, this isn't a 4th amendment issue. The data in question (web site documents) are being voluntarily conveyed to the public (that's the point). How can you assert that there is an expectation of privacy in that context? This is, BTW, why "pen registers" which capture the numbers dialed from a given individual's phone do not require a warrant to install. Because that information (the phone number) is being voluntarily conveyed to a third party, to wit: the telephone company. I don't particularly like what the SEC is up to, but the solution is not contained in the 4th amendment.
