Olmstead v. United States
**Overview of Olmstead v. United States**
Olmstead v. United States is a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1928 that addressed the legality of wiretapping and its implications for the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Roy Olmstead, a suspected leader of a bootlegging operation, was convicted based partly on evidence obtained through wiretaps of his phone conversations, which federal agents conducted without a warrant. The crux of the case revolved around whether these wiretaps constituted an unreasonable search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment and whether the resulting evidence violated Olmstead's right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment.
In a narrow 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that wiretapping did not fall under the protections of the Fourth Amendment, as it pertained to physical searches and seizures rather than conversations. This ruling set a precedent regarding the government's ability to monitor private communications without a warrant. Despite the Olmstead ruling, federal legislation later established unauthorized wiretapping as a crime, reflecting ongoing concerns about privacy rights. Ultimately, the decision was overturned in 1967 by Katz v. United States, which recognized the protection of privacy in communications, even without physical entry, under the Fourth Amendment. This evolution highlights the ongoing legal and societal debates regarding privacy, government surveillance, and individual rights.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Olmstead v. United States
The Case: U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on the application of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to wiretapping private telephone conversations
Date: Decided on June 4, 1928
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Olmstead v. United States held that the Fourth Amendment guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizure did not apply to the government’s wiretapping of private telephone conversations. The Court also ruled that since the Fourth Amendment had not been violated, the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination could not apply.
Roy Olmstead, the suspected ringleader of an extensive bootlegging operation, was convicted of conspiring with about fifty other people to unlawfully import, possess, transport, and sell alcohol in violation of the National Prohibition Act. Federal officers gathered incriminating information against the defendants via wiretaps from the streets near the defendants’ homes and in the basement of Olmstead’s office. The placement of the wiretaps did not involve physical entry onto the defendants’ property. Olmstead challenged the conviction on the grounds that the wiretapped private telephone conversations recorded by federal officers without a warrant had been admitted in his criminal trial in violation of his Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Olmstead’s conviction, and he appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In Olmstead v. United States, the specific issue before the Court was whether the introduction into evidence of private telephone conversations intercepted by means of a wiretap violated the defendant’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. By a vote of five to four, the Court held that listening to communications passing over telephone wires did not constitute a search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment, because the evidence was simply a conversation and no physical entry of the defendants’ houses or offices had taken place. In upholding Olmstead’s conviction, the Court reasoned that the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures only applied to material things such as persons, houses, and papers, and did not apply to voluntary conversations that were overhead. The Court further held that since the Fourth Amendment did not apply, the Fifth Amendment argument had to be dismissed.
Impact
The Olmstead decision was the first case to consider the legality of wiretaps. The Communications Act of 1934 made unauthorized wiretapping a federal crime. Nevertheless, the federal law did little to deter wiretapping and eavesdropping by government officials. The Olmstead decision was overturned in Katz v. United States in 1967, whereby the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment applied to eavesdropping, including wiretapping, even when it occurs without physical entry, because the amendment protects people’s right to privacy anytime there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Bibliography
Charns, Alexander. Cloak and Gavel: FBI Wiretaps, Bugs, Informers, and the Supreme Court. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992.
Kuhn, Betsy. Prying Eyes: Privacy in the Twenty-First Century. Minneapolis, Minn.: Twenty-First Century Books, 2008.