NSmolenskiFan on Nostr: ...
https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/revising-bank-secrecy-act-protect-privacy-deter-criminals#united-states-v-miller
"I wash my hands of today’s extended redundancy by the Court. Because the recordkeeping requirements of the [Bank Secrecy] Act [of 1970] order the seizure of customers’ bank records without a warrant and probable cause, I believe the Act is unconstitutional and that respondent has standing to raise the claim. Since the Act is unconstitutional, the Government cannot rely on records kept pursuant to it in prosecuting bank customers."
- Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, one of two dissenting opinions in United States v. Miller (1976), which established "Third Party Doctrine." The doctrine states that Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless search and seizure do not apply to records kept by a third party.
"I wash my hands of today’s extended redundancy by the Court. Because the recordkeeping requirements of the [Bank Secrecy] Act [of 1970] order the seizure of customers’ bank records without a warrant and probable cause, I believe the Act is unconstitutional and that respondent has standing to raise the claim. Since the Act is unconstitutional, the Government cannot rely on records kept pursuant to it in prosecuting bank customers."
- Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, one of two dissenting opinions in United States v. Miller (1976), which established "Third Party Doctrine." The doctrine states that Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless search and seizure do not apply to records kept by a third party.