Christopher Pierce

Honors in Political Science

Majors: Political Science and Criminology & Criminal Justice

Supervisor: Daniels Masters, Political Science

The Balance between Liberty and Government Power:

Predicting the Stability of Precedent for Wiretap Surveillance

Post-9/11 national security legislation swiftly and dramatically reshaped executive power in a number of ways, and one such way was expanding wiretap searches. The result of this transformation has not yet been examined by the Supreme Court and as a result may set the stage for a reinterpretation of long-standing precedent concerning warrantless wiretap searches for national security and the Fourth Amendment. This study examines whether a reinterpretation of Fourth Amendment precedent is likely. Prior research by James Spriggs and Thomas Hansford develops a Political Jurisprudence Model that tests the stability of Supreme Court precedent. Their research is based on a set of variables related to Court ideology, history of the precedent, and legal basis of the precedent that predict the stability of existing precedent. This study uses Spriggs and Hansford research to evaluate the state of Fourth Amendment case law of the Supreme Court that involves wiretap searches for national security and any potential for reinterpretation. The study finds that the Fourth Amendment precedent examined is instable and in danger of being reversed.