On behalf of our activist community, I urge you to contact your senators and representative and ask them to support the Protecting Data at the Border Act, S. 823 and H.R. 1899, introduced by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Reps. Jared Polis (R-Colo.) and Blake Farenthold (R-Texas). The bills would safeguard the Fourth Amendment rights of American citizens at the border.

The debate regarding encryption and privacy in the digital age has become a hot-button issue in light of the recent legal struggles between Apple and the FBI. Many technology producers and consumers have become particularly concerned with their messaging privacy, fearing similar compelled actions forced by governments. In response to these concerns, the developers at WhatsApp have taken a strong stance in favor of encryption, protecting the privacy rights of people around the world.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) offered a nearly 11-hour constitutional seminar on Wednesday evening. He defended Americans’ civil liberties against problematic provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act that have been broadly interpreted to allow the federal government to illegally conduct mass surveillance against law-abiding Americans.

The steps the administration had taken to rein abuse of civil asset forfeiture were undermined on Wednesday when President Barack Obama signed an executive order that ignores Fifth Amendment protections for due process, authorizing the seizure of property from those who are merely suspected of cyber-crime.

On February 6 the Federalist Society held as Civil Asset Forfeiture Update on Capitol Hill with the American Civil Liberties Union and the Institute for Justice as cosponsors. The event was held to bring more awareness to the issue which has been in the news lately with Eric Holder’s limiting order (which will leave around 86% federal civil seizure unaffected), recent legislative efforts and late night television skits. The event featured a diverse panel consisting of: Darpana Sheth (IJ), Kanya Bennett (ACLU), David Smith (Smith & Zimmerman PLLC) and Bill Piper (Drug Policy Alliance).

This title was adopted from a line by Justice Sotomayor during the recent Supreme Court oral arguments in Rodriguez v. United States. Over time there has been an encroachment on our Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches, as Justice Sotomayor also said, “. . . we can’t keep bending the Fourth Amendment to the resources of law enforcement.” It is time for the courts to push back and protect our constitutional rights. Fortunately, two recent cases, one at the Supreme Court and another at the circuit level, have given great opportunities to do just this.

President Barack Obama delivered his sixth State of the Union address to Congress last night, laying out a litany of mostly terrible policy proposals, as well as attempting to defend his economic record. There's no denying that he's a strong orator who tells a story very well, but the substance of the speech itself was more of the same stale ideas and poor leadership that Americans have seen throughout the course of his presidency. Though there are plenty of policy items worthy of analysis, here are some lines that stuck out.

On Tuesday, the D.C. Council unanimously endorsed a bill that aims to seriously reform the practice of civil asset forfeiture by the Metropolitan Police Department. The second and final vote on the measure will take place December 2.

An interesting ruling regarding cell phone privacy has emerged from a Virginia Circuit Court. Judge Steven Frucci of Virginia’s 2nd Judicial Circuit has ruled that law enforcement can compel someone to unlock his cellphone by fingerprint identification, but cannot compel one to divulge his passcode in order to unlock the device.

The Supreme Court will begin its next term October 6 and will hear cases into June 2015. So far, the Court has accepted about 40 cases, which is about half of the expected argument docket.