Skip to main content
PRINT EDITION

Beware What You Google: Fourth Amendment Constitutionality of Keyword Warrants

Abstract: Many Americans have potentially had their privacy rights invaded through invisible, widespread police searches. In recent years, local and federal governments have compelled Google and other search engine companies to produce the personal information of users who have conducted a search query related to a crime. By using keyword warrants, the government can conduct a dragnet search for suspects, imposing suspicion on users and exposing their personal information. The keyword warrant is a symptom of the erosion of the Fourth Amendment protection against suspicionless searches. Not only is scholarship scarce on keyword warrants, but also instances of these warrants are rare because the court often seals the records. This Comment argues that keyword warrants are unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment because these warrants do not meet the particularity requirement, which requires warrants to name the place or person to be searched. Here, keyword warrants cast a wide net on potentially thousands of individuals. In response, technology companies should be more involved in fighting to secure the personal information of their users, not only for their customers’ benefit, but to protect the integrity of their product. Additionally, while courts should be striking down keyword warrants, this Comment advises legislatures to curb the government’s use of essential technologies, like search engines, as a means of surveillance.

Download the Full Article

Other Articles from WLR Print Edition

March 1, 2025 in PRINT EDITION

What’s Important to Write About? A Century of Washington Law Review Topics

Abstract: This Article examines the topics of all lead articles in Washington Law Review during its past ninety-eight years of publication. The analysis illustrates the changing interests of legal academics,…
Read More
March 1, 2025 in PRINT EDITION

Tenant Rights Deserve Consumer Protections: The Case for Overturning State v. Schwab

Abstract: Tenancy is a precarious housing arrangement—tenants do not own their homes yet depend on housing stability as a foundation for engaging in almost all aspects of life. For more…
Read More
March 1, 2025 in PRINT EDITION

Washington’s Implementation of Legalized Cannabis: A Model for Other States and the Federal Government

Abstract: This Article examines the process and outcomes of cannabis legalization in Washington State, offering insights for other states and potential federal legalization schemes. It begins with an overview of…
Read More