Orin Kerr Profile picture
Sep 19, 2020 9 tweets 3 min read Read on X
Notable: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court adopts new test for establishing a racially discriminatory traffic stop under its state constitution to make it less difficult to establish such a claim, overturning 2008 decision. mass.gov/files/document… #N ImageImage
As I read this, the prior decision, Lora, effectively required data on that officer's prior stops showing that the officer was disproportionately stopping people by race. But that data has been hard to get, so the burden is too hard to satisfy. Image
The new case adopts an easier-to-prove standard specifically tailored to traffic stops. From the opinion: Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
This all sounds legislative from a modern federal court lens, but then it's not a federal court: This is the Massachusetts high court interpreting the state equal protection clause in the Mass Declaration of Rights, so it doesn't need to echo federal court rulings. /end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Orin Kerr

Orin Kerr Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @OrinKerr

Apr 19
Among the new demands issued by student "Berkeley Law for Palestine" group after Chemerinsky/Fisk dinner: Correct Erwin Chemerinsky's understanding of the First Amendment. Image
Some UC Assistant General Counsel goes to library, gets First Amendment book for an expert's view... Image
Or perhaps instead looks for a law school course to study the matter more in depth this summer.....
law.berkeley.edu/php-programs/c…
Image
Read 6 tweets
Dec 13, 2023
NOTABLE: Google announces dramatic changes to its "location history" function that should nullify all geofence warrants going forward—and I wouldn't be surprised if that is the point. Code is law, as they say.
(h/t ) blog.google/products/maps/…
fourthamendment.com
Image
As I read this, Google will no longer keep geolocation data even for the subset of users that turn on location history. The data will only be stored locally. Geofence warrants are used when the govt has no suspects, to get some leads, so this will likely defeat the technique.
There's a very important surveillance story to be written on how Google came to this decision. I hope we'll get to read it, I'd be very interested to know.
Read 4 tweets
Aug 16, 2023
I'm reading the newly-released transcript of Twitter's proceedings before Judge Howell on Twitter's compliance with the warrant for Trump's account. Here are thoughts as I go.
dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/file…
First, this should be good. The lawyers are experienced lawyers from WilmerHale, and Judge Howell knows more about the Stored Communications Act than any other district judge. This is no one's first rodeo.
p. 6, Howell is starting off frustrated with Twitter. Image
Read 16 tweets
Aug 3, 2023
“A lot of times he’ll tell me that he lost, but he wants to keep fighting it, and he thinks that there might be enough to overturn the election." -- Mark Meadows on Trump, November 18, 2022, according Cassidy Hutchinson.
One interesting thing about the latest Trump indictment is that it doesn't detail reports that Trump admitted he lost, leading some to suggest that they have no such evidence. But it not being detailed doesn't mean it doesn't exist. cnn.com/2023/06/06/pol…
More. https://t.co/ZnFQ6huEGCnews.yahoo.com/trump-admitted…
Image
Read 5 tweets
Jul 26, 2023
Is access to Automated License Plate Reader info a 4th Amendment Search? Oral argument on this in US v. Mapson, 21-13668, see here, 2nd link.

A few thoughts on the argument.

ca11.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-…
Defendant's side, 1st 25 minutes, didn't have much 4A discussion. There are three co-defendants, and only the 2nd defendant is making the ALPR argument. And it's being made in a very tentative way.
At the argument, the defense counsel arguing the ALPR point conceded that a single ALPR reading would not be a search. When asked where the line was, he just said it should be a totality test. (Aside: This is what you say when you don't know; no one knows.)
Read 11 tweets
Jul 14, 2023
Yesterday, at the 8th Circuit judicial conference, Justice Kavanaugh gave a talk that included two interesting pieces of advice for Supreme Court advocates—one explicit, the other implicit. Tne talk isn't online, so I thought I would tweet about them. #appellatetwitter

🧵
First, he said that several Justices, himself included, believe that the two-minute uninterrupted opening time they now give advocates is a really critical time for advocates. You should use it well.
He suggested that Justices listen carefully to that opening, in part because they're listening for subtle ways that the argument may have changed between the written brief and the argument. They know arguments are mooted, and some ground may have shifted.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(