Share this page!

Orin Kerr Profile picture
Twitter logo
3 Jun, 4 tweets, 2 min read
I thought "Above the Law" had a policy of not naming students who did dumb things. (@Kathryn1, I gather I'm wrong about that or it was repealed?)
CC: @DavidLat, who I thought adopted that policy. But I read about it a long time ago, and it may no longer be ATL's policy.
I think here's the post I was thinking of, although it link to a description that is . . . down. abovethelaw.com/2009/07/above-…
Here's the old ATL policy, which I gather isn't still the policy.

• • •

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

Orin Kerr Profile picture
3 Jun
A longish thread on Van Buren: Where does it leave the CFAA?

Here's a first cut.
The computer hacking statute, the CFAA, prohibits two things: access without authorization, and exceeds authorized access. Access without authorization is understood to require some kind of breaking in. The question here is whether exceeds authorized access does, too.
As I read the new decision, the Court says yes -- exceeding authorized access also requires some breaking in. The court agrees with the defendant's claim that the two prohibitions are similar -- at just different stages. The Court calls this a "gates-up-or-down" inquiry.
Read 17 tweets
Orin Kerr Profile picture
12 Apr
There's a lot to be said about the traffic stop of Lieutenant Caron Nazario, but one of them is that it makes this 2015 blog post unfortunately relevant again:
"Sandra Bland and the 'Lawful Order’ Problem."
(Given the paywall, I'll include screenshots.)
washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-co…
Read 14 tweets
Orin Kerr Profile picture
9 Apr
This is is my dad, a Holocaust survivor, telling one story of lucky survival in the concentration camps.

The Germans held 516 boys at one camp. They sent 10 cattle cars, designated to fit 50 people each, to Auschwitz --to be killed.

They picked 16 boys to stay. My dad was one.
Posted in commemoration of Yom HaShoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day.

For a previous thread with some context, start here:
The interview above was recorded in 1997, and none of it has ever been shown outside my family before. At some point I'm going to make a full length edited video of it to post on Youtube (it was 5+ hours long, so it needs to be shortened). But, for now, this excerpt.
Read 4 tweets
Orin Kerr Profile picture
8 Apr
When a father consented to a search of his "son's account" on their jointly used computer, investigators exceeded the scope of consent when they searched the recycle bin, which included files from multiple users. Child porn found there is suppressed.
wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/Dis… #N
The forensic tool used to search the computer grouped the deleted files from all accounts in the same place, the recycle bin, without indicating from which account a particular file had originated. Acc to the court, using the tool to search that was beyond the scope of consent.
This case touches on a question that I cover in my computer crime law casebook and discuss in my class: How do you apply consent principles to computer searches when people consent in regular-user-speak but forensic analysts think in forensic-tool-speak?
Read 6 tweets
Orin Kerr Profile picture
7 Apr
Many, myself included, have expressed amusement (or horror) about how splintered and long the 5th Circuit's decision is. Perhaps worth noting that at least some of that may reflect the fact that it's a facial challenge.

Thread below.
Some background: Most constitutional arguments are "as applied" challenges, in which a person will claim the government did something unconstitutional. But some challenges are "facial" challenges, in which the challenge is to the statute itself.
With "as applied" challenges, there's usually an ultimate ruling: Is the action constitutional or unconstitutional? But facial challenges can be more complicated, because the challenger may challenge several different parts of the statute, on different rationals.
Read 5 tweets
Orin Kerr Profile picture
4 Apr
How does the 4th Amendment apply to the "U.S. Private Vaults" case, busting the Beverly Hills store where people could anonymously store guns and drugs (and anything else)?

A thread.

latimes.com/california/sto…
First, the alleged facts. The store hosted safe deposit boxes at a strip mall. Their selling point was total privacy: You pay big $$$, and you can store anything there and no one will know. According to prosecutors, the business was trying to entice those engaged in crimes.
The store didn't want to know who its customers were. They just wanted the very large payments in exchange for privacy. I gather this is their website, and Youtube plug:

usprivatevaults.com/rental-prices

Read 10 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

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

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @OrinKerr has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @OrinKerr!

Read all threads by @OrinKerr

:(