Project Veritas sued over sealed search warrant materials, and it\u2019s been four years since the warrants. There\u2019s 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).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The information in the warrant affidavit collectively show probable cause. \u201cBut, 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.\u201d [Picking at them one by one doesn\u2019t satisfy the totality standard.] United States v. Combs, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118698 (N.D. Ohio May 29, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cPlaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claim is based on the City’s \u2018threats to inspect the hotel without a warrant or consent.\u2019 The Fourth Amendment \u2018protects two types of expectations, one involving \u201csearches,\u201d the other \u201cseizures.\u201d\u2019 \u2026 Plaintiffs allege no facts that show any imminent \u2018threat\u2019 to inspect their property without consent or a warrant. Rather, their only specific allegation is that the City \u2018demanded\u2019 permission to inspect the property at issue, which necessarily required Plaintiffs’ consent. These allegations are insufficient to support a Fourth Amendment claim.\u201d Verge v. City of L.A., 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 15413 (9th Cir. May 27, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Project Veritas sued over sealed search warrant materials, and it\u2019s been four years since the warrants. There\u2019s a public interest in disclosure, and the government shall file in camera proposed redactions of the materials. Generalized claims of law enforcement need … Continue reading