S.D.N.Y.: Four year old SW materials were subject to redaction and in camera submission to see about release

Project Veritas sued over sealed search warrant materials, and it’s been four years since the warrants. There’s a public interest in disclosure, and the government shall file in camera proposed redactions of the materials. Generalized claims of law enforcement need do not suffice. In re Search Warrant Dated Nov. 5, 2021, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118739 (S.D.N.Y. May 29, 2026).

The information in the warrant affidavit collectively show probable cause. “But, the search warrant affidavit here is supported by more than unsupported confidential source information. And those confidential sources upon which the affidavit relies were witnesses to the underlying crime itself.” [Picking at them one by one doesn’t satisfy the totality standard.] United States v. Combs, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118698 (N.D. Ohio May 29, 2026).*

“Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claim is based on the City’s ‘threats to inspect the hotel without a warrant or consent.’ The Fourth Amendment ‘protects two types of expectations, one involving “searches,” the other “seizures.”’ … Plaintiffs allege no facts that show any imminent ‘threat’ to inspect their property without consent or a warrant. Rather, their only specific allegation is that the City ‘demanded’ permission to inspect the property at issue, which necessarily required Plaintiffs’ consent. These allegations are insufficient to support a Fourth Amendment claim.” Verge v. City of L.A., 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 15413 (9th Cir. May 27, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Administrative search, Probable cause, Warrant papers. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.