Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1968

Publication Information

43 Notre Dame Law. 657 (1968).

Abstract

The purpose of this article is not to enter into the still active debate on the propriety of electronic surveillance, nor is it to reexamine the policy arguments for and against court order electronic surveillance legislation. Debate needs to be brought down to specifics. Mr. Justice Holmes had a favorite admonition, "[T]hink things instead of words." It is our purpose, therefore, to give to that debate a concrete proposal." Our proposal is a statute that is intended to serve as a starting point for meaningful dialogue; it is not meant to be the final word in the debate.

Comments

Reprinted with permission of Notre Dame Law Review (previously Notre Dame Lawyer).

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.