Olmstead vs. New York (1928) - Assignment Example

This continued for a period of five months and the recorded conversation overheard was 775 typewritten pages. Olmstead had been tapped eight telephones in his home and office and offices of the other defendants charged with and some in their homes. Prohibition Agent listened over the taped conversation on behalf of the federal government under their official capacity and reported message retrieved (Gunther & Dowling 564). The evidence disclosed a conspiracy where an astonishing magnitude of distribution, possession, sales and import of liquor unlawfully.

More than fifty persons were employed in sea going vessels to transport the liquor to Colombia and smaller vessels could be used to transport the liquor to the coast of the state of Washington. Wire tapping long experience lineman was then employed on behalf of the federal government and, on its expense to end this. Olmstead argued that the telephone wire tapped was equal to an illegal search on his property and therefore, he was denied his right for privacy under the Fourth Amendment. The court on contrary ruled that the electronic device did not include physical entry arguing that Olmstead had been broadcasting to the general public.

Justice Taft went further to write the majority opinion, "the amendment language cannot be expanded and extended to include telephone, connecting globally from defendant’s house and or office. The intervening wires are highways along were they are stretched but neither part of his house nor the office”. After taking some type of invasion of privacy justice brandies envisioned later became a reality, he developed to be one of the most citied options in the Supreme Court (Gunther & Dowling 566).

By often using objections, the defendants asked for permission to access the evidence acquired by wire tapping. They claimed that it consisted of unreasonable search and sequestration which is the Fourth Amendment violation, and that the use conversation overheard as evidence compelled the defendant from being witnesses against themselves in the Fifth Amendment violation (Gunther & Dowling 566). The purpose of the Fourth Amendments commonly referred to as general warrant or writs of assistance were to prevent citizens from force search of property, owns personalities, papers and effects by the government and prevention from unwilling seizure.

Opposing the ruling opinion, that was based on the view of search as a native physical action on private property, Justice Louis Brandeis argued; delicacy and more expansive means of tress passing privacy has become common in the government (Gunther & Dowling 567). Invention and innovation has made the government massively in disclosing in court what is actually whispered in the closet. Furthermore, when applying the constitution, believe cannot only be what has been, but what may be.’ The science generation in providing the government with a way of spying is not likely going to stop with wire tapping.

Methods may someday be developed that the government will not be required to remove papers from drawers; this will enable to expose jury and some of the most intimate act of the home. This places the liberty of all citizens in the hands of every officer. Tempering with telephones is far much evil in privacy invasion just like tempering with mails. When a telephone line is tapped, the privacy of both the receiver and the ringer