Orin S. Kerr | Lightnews

Light up
your news

About Privacy Terms Help

Orin Kerr

Orin Kerr

@orinkerr.bsky.social

30K followers 920 following 2K posts

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%

more

Posts Replies Media Videos

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 11h

I should probably write up my 2022 experience with being a juror before I forget the details, but for now, a reply to Josh Blackman on law professors as jurors.
reason.com/volokh/2025/...

My Experience as a Law Professor Juror

I thought I would flag in response to Josh's post that I served on a criminal jury three years ago—and…

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 1d

BTW, there's actually a super interesting question lurking in the case that I asked on my spring CrimPro exam: Is there a suppression remedy for excessive force actions, and if so, on what standards? But the court finds the force here reasonable.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 1d

Oral argument in the case is here:
www.courtlistener.com/audio/100264...

Oral Argument for United States v. Davonte Coe – CourtListener.com

Oral Argument for United States v. Davonte Coe

www.courtlistener.com

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 1d

Just so I follow, what do you expect them to do?

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 1d

I went on PACER and pulled the suppression hearing transcript. Here's the relevant testimony without the ellipses, for those wondering.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 1d

Fourth Circuit publishes an opinion to make a point that otherwise would go unseen.
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 1d

Hard to know, but I wonder if this might have been a change to make SCOTUS review less likely. An alternative holding on state law presumably makes it hard to get SCOTUS interested in resolving the uncertainty on cross-enforcing federal law.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 1d

Ninth Circuit hands down revised opinion in US v. Steinman, the cross-enforcement case from March, on panel rehearing.

Revised op:
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op... #N

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 2d

cc @marinklevy.bsky.social

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 2d

h/t @marklemley.bsky.social

Reposted by Mark A. Lemley, James Grimmelmann

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 2d

Below the line of the 1st page of Professor Dan Burk's last article, just published posthumously by the UC Irvine Law Review.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 2d

Very pleased to say that my new article, "The Two Tests of Search Law: What Is the Jones Test, and What Does That Say About Katz?", has just been published in final form by the Wash. U. L. Rev. You can now download it from here:
wustllawreview.org/2025/11/12/t...

Abstract below.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 3d

Last month, I did a talk and conversation on "The Fourth Amendment and Immigration Raids" on the Supreme Court's overturning of the injunction in the LA immigration enforcement case, with Duncan Hosie.

The Chicago case, now pending in the CA7, raises similar issues.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxmO...

The Fourth Amendment and Immigration Raids | Stanford Constitutional Law Center

YouTube video by Stanford Law School

www.youtube.com

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 5d

No, to be clear, it's Prosser poking fun at those questions with an imaginary set of questions back.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 5d

Back in the 1950s, law schools apparently received inquiries (from potential applicants, I assume?) that sometimes included a lot of questions. Here, Dean Prosser of UC Berkeley imagines a reply.
jle.aals.org/home/vol10/i...

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 5d

I can't believe there's a case on this in 2025, but there it is.

Op here, State v. Hickman.
appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=...

appellate.nccourts.org

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 5d

State Dept of Revenue issues warrant to search for and seize any property of value of suspect for failure to pay taxes on profits from selling meth. Searching her residence, officers find meth.

NC Court of Appeals: Can't get a warrant for this under the 4A. Meth suppressed.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 5d

Why do you think originalism defeats the concept of a constitution?

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 6d

hat seems odd to me. Why isn't this just a case of so-called "transferred intent"? They were intending to restrain a person, even if, tragically, the wrong person was hit.

Wouldn't effect the result, as there were other issues, but still noteworthy. cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op...

cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 6d

Officers try to shoot hostage taker, accidentally shoot and kill hostage. This did not "seize" the hostage under Torres v. Madrid, CA9 rules, as the intent to restrain was lacking; they were trying to free the hostage, not restrain him.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 6d

Here's a law professor lamenting the fads in legal theory popular among law professors that become popular for a decade or two and then fade away— written in 1950. Specifically, it's Roscoe Pound, reflecting on trends since he became a lawyer in 1890.
jle.aals.org/cgi/viewcont...

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 8d

Is it a government vampire?

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 10d

But we're talking about a phrase that appears at the end of a long dissent. You can point that, if this weren't the case and we lived in a different world, you could draw likely conclusions about the phrase. But it's the case in the world we're in, which is why we're discussing it that way.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 10d

I disagree. When a writer says, "Respectfully, your ideas are stupid," I don't think we treat the words "Respectfully" as adding actual politeness. We know the author is not speaking respectfully, so the "respectfully" addition comes off as insincere.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 10d

Was 2004 the pre-zinger world? Everyone was on blogs, with insta-commentary on every word choice in opinions and plenty of harsh criticism.

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 10d

I think the press writes a lot about this, which makes it a thing in the press; I don't know whether it's become a thing among the Justices. (But if it is, it's rather silly.)

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 10d

But "I dissent" is not impolite, and "I respectfully dissent" is not polite when it's at the end of a very disrespectful dissent. The characterization at the end doesn't change whether the opinion is respectful.

Reposted by Jonathan H. Adler

Orin Kerr @orinkerr.bsky.social · 10d

I agree with Paul Horwitz on this: Although I greatly value respect when dissenting, it seems silly to care whether there's an included statement describing one's own dissent as respectful. It's like a law review article that describes its claims as novel; that's not up to the author to decide.