Orin Kerr
banner
orinkerr.bsky.social
Orin Kerr
@orinkerr.bsky.social

Professor, Stanford Law School.
Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution.

Author, The Digital 4th Amendment:
https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Fourth-Amendment-Privacy-Policing/dp/0190627077/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0

Orin Samuel Kerr is an American legal scholar known for his studies of American criminal procedure and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as well as computer crime law and internet surveillance. He has been a professor of law at Stanford Law School since 2025. Kerr is one of the contributors to the law-oriented blog titled The Volokh Conspiracy. .. more

Political science 35%
Law 28%

Motion to suppress granted for unlawfully delaying a stop when officers muted their microphones and spoke for several minutes before sending the drug detection dog to sniff the driver—who had drugs in his fanny pack. US v. Green, 2026 WL 413864 (D.Conn. 2/15) (Oliver, J.)

100%

The Supreme Court's rules, as of 1803.
www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/rules/r...

Should the CFAA legalize hacking back? Herb Lin and I agree that the answer is, well, no.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElI0...
Hacking Back? | Balancing Act with John Katko
YouTube video by Balancing Act with John Katko
www.youtube.com

Nickname his mother and his wife used for him.

On this light factual record, police helicopter flying very low over property, where marijuana plants were seen, is not a search, Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. rules.
www.tncourts.gov/sites/defaul...

I don’t like Cardozo’s work as a Justice. At least in the areas I encounter, his opinions generally beg the question, often buried in pompous abstractions.
Justice.as

Bunny?

TFW you're trying to understand how courts understood a doctrine 100 years ago, and you come across an old reference to a "leading case," which you look up, and it's by Learned Hand—and it explains beautifully exactly what you were trying to understand.

Lesson: L. Hand delivers.

And that raises the inevitable discovery issue, which the judges may have been unsure of whether they could reach.

Years ago, soon after I had moved to a new neighborhood, an elderly neighbor had passed and her surviving relatives had put several old books in a box by the street to be recycled. I found this very tiny book of poems in the box, and I loved the inscription. I have kept it ever since.

This should be good.

Sign up: stanford.zoom.us/webinar/regi...

Reposted by Orin S. Kerr

Come for our deep dive into the Don Lemon indictment and stay for our companion piece about the deeply weird process that led up to it!
www.lawfaremedia.org/article/when...

As I say on the podcast, I am a simple country Fourth Amendment lawyer compared to the two of them, but I thought our mix of theory and focus on discreet cases made for a particularly interesting conversation (and Jonathan and Jud are just always fantastic).

I really enjoyed this podcast conversation about originalism in the lower courts, with experts on originalism @jgienapp.bsky.social and Jud Campbell. Thanks to the Short Circuit crowd for having us.

Reposted by Orin S. Kerr

Reposted by Orin S. Kerr

Just noticing that the Fulton Co election records search warrant affidavit entirely omits the mental state (“willfully”) required to commit the 1st of the 2 crimes cited. The FBI agent makes it sound like a strict liability crime, which it's not. (Sorry if this has already been widely reported.)

At the time, they were the Miles quintet together, but I take it Herbie was the star at that point: He had a huge hit with Watermelon Man in 1963.

Yes, I'll be writing a lot about it, I suspect.

The complication, I think, is that the driver had a suspended license. So you don't have the situation in Rodriguez in which the stop ends and the driver drives off. The timing of that is somewhat tricky, I think. (I gather you think it's easy, which is fine.)

CA3 rejects 1A challenge to NJ law that limits sharing of computer code used to make ghosts guns, per Krause. Splitting w/ other circuits: 1A regulates only expressive uses of code, and plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient facts relevant to expressive use.
www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/233...

This wasn't an obvious case, and I can see why it took a while. But yikes, look at that.

Yep.

Should last about an hour.

Reposted by Paul M. Schwartz

United States v. Chatrie, the geofence warrant case, is now scheduled for oral argument on Monday, April 27th.
www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docke...
Docket for 25-112
www.supremecourt.gov

Apologies if I'm missing something, but I thought the 6th Circuit had 16 active judges, with three (Ritz, Moore, Griffin) on the panel.

GOP-nominated judges split 8 yes on rehearing 2 no, Democratic judges voted 0 yes, all 6 no.

Sorry, working link for the denial en banc.
www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf...
www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov

Panel opinion is here:
cases.justia.com/federal/appe...
cases.justia.com

Sixth Circuit denies rehearing en banc 8-8 in excessive force case, over the dissents of 8 of the 10 GOP-nominated judges. (Sutton and Kethledge did not join them.)
opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf...