Dow Chemical Co. v. United States

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: references need to be formatted. Please help improve this article if you can. (May 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (May 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Dow Chemical Co. v. United States
6th Cir. 1984); cert. granted, 472 U.S. 1007 (1985).
Holding
The Fourth Amendment protects against the invasion of areas where intimate activities occur, whereas "the open areas of an industrial complex are more comparable to an 'open field' in which an individual may not legitimately demand privacy."
Court membership
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Case opinions
Majority	Burger, joined by White, Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor
Concur/dissent	Powell (concur Part III, dissent Parts I-II), joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. IV

Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986), was a

and advanced technology of aerial surveillance.

Factual background and decision

The

EPA

used, without a warrant, a commercial aerial photographer to get photographs of a heavily guarded Dow facility that was, according to the petitioner, protected by the State Trade Secrecy Law. The decision: For purposes of aerial surveillance, the open areas of an industrial complex are more comparable to an "open field" in which an individual may not legitimately demand privacy.[1] In the absence of a "reasonable expectation of privacy" the Fourth Amendment prohibiting unreasonable searches does not apply.

See also

• Aerial surveillance doctrine
• California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986)
• California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988)
• Curtilage
• Expectation of privacy
• Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989)
• Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001)
• Open-fields doctrine

References

Further reading

• Diane Rosenwasser Skalak, Dow Chemical Co. v. United States: Aerial Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment, 3 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 277 (1986) Available at: http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol3/iss2/6
• "AERIAL SEARCHES OF FENCED AREAS UPHELD BY COURT," The New York Times (May 20, 1986)

External links

• Text of Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) is available from: Findlaw  Google Scholar  Justia  Library of Congress  Oyez (oral argument audio)