| − | Justice Scalia, for a 5-4 Court, cited this case approvingly in finding that a warrantless attachment of a [[GPS]] device to a suspect's car violated the [[Fourth Amendment]]: | + | Justice Scalia, for a 5-4 portion of his decision for a Court unanimous in judgment, cited this case approvingly in finding that a warrantless attachment of a [[GPS]] device to a suspect's car violated the [[Fourth Amendment]]: |
| | {{cquote|More recently, in Soldal v. Cook County, 506 U.S. 56, 113 S. Ct. 538, 121 L. Ed. 2d 450 (1992), the Court unanimously rejected the argument that although a “seizure” had occurred “in a 'technical' sense” when a trailer home was forcibly removed, id., at 62, 113 S. Ct. 538, 121 L. Ed. 2d 450, no Fourth Amendment violation occurred because law enforcement had not “invade[d] the [individuals'] privacy,” id., at 60, 113 S. Ct. 538, 121 L. Ed. 2d 450.}} | | {{cquote|More recently, in Soldal v. Cook County, 506 U.S. 56, 113 S. Ct. 538, 121 L. Ed. 2d 450 (1992), the Court unanimously rejected the argument that although a “seizure” had occurred “in a 'technical' sense” when a trailer home was forcibly removed, id., at 62, 113 S. Ct. 538, 121 L. Ed. 2d 450, no Fourth Amendment violation occurred because law enforcement had not “invade[d] the [individuals'] privacy,” id., at 60, 113 S. Ct. 538, 121 L. Ed. 2d 450.}} |
| | ''[[United States v. Jones]]'', 565 U.S. 400, 407, 132 S. Ct. 945, 951 (2012). | | ''[[United States v. Jones]]'', 565 U.S. 400, 407, 132 S. Ct. 945, 951 (2012). |