DLK vs.

United States: A Matter of Privacy

The use of technology has increased exponentially since its origins. The DLK case was
found by government officials using a thermal imager to scan the suspect's house, and found
abnormal heat signatures coming from the windows. This lead them to search the house, and
founds marijuana plants inside the house, and DLK was arrested. The controversy that arose
from this situation was: Was the police allowed to scan DLK's house in the first place, without
his consent? The government went too far in search and seizure in the DLK case, because the
government was invading DLK's privacy without reasonable suspicion.
Thermal technology is really useful, but it has to be used responsibly by the government.
A thermal scanner, or thermal imager, is a tool that can be used to detect differences of heat on a
surface. Used by the government, the thermal scanner showed DLK's house, as shown in
Document C, in a manner that showed excessive heat signatures surrounding all of the windows
and doors, which lead to DLK's exposure and arrest. Explained in Document B, the heat
signatures arose suspicion because marijuana plants need sunlight to grow, but could not be near
windows, or else they would be seen. Instead, DLK used artificial light to simulate sunlight,
which created excess heat which had to be let out. Some might believe that because the imager
only scanned the outside, it was not infringing on DLK's privacy, according to Document E.
The government didn't see the situation as an invasion of privacy. According to the
government in Document E, since the imager scanned the outside of the house and none of the
inside, no information about DLK's home could be taken. This relates to the Carroll case in
Document A, because this was a scenario where evidence could be taken away quickly, so the
government thought it would be 'impractical' to make a warrant. The difference is, the evidence
found in DLK's home could be moved very quickly, leaving enough time to receive a warrant.
The government also claims that heat waves, "enter the public domain if and when they leave a
building" in Document F, therefore making the scan seemingly justified.
But on the other hand, in Document F, the device used to scan DLK's home was not of
public use, and should be considered as unconstitutional without permission or a warrant. This
case is similar to the Katz case stated in Document A, because both cases involved the unknown,
unwarranted use of technology to gather information, which should be unconstitutional. DLK did
not intend for his heat signatures to be discovered by technology that is used by the government,
because he should not have to worry about being discovered by technology. "Thermal radiation
is not...exposed to public view..." according to Document D, which means that there should be
nothing for the government to investigate unless there is a warrant.
The government should have had a warrant to be able to search DLK's home. It is an
unconstitutional invasion of privacy through the government. Although DLK did commit a
serious crime, and was rightfully caught, the method of doing so was unconstitutional on the
government's part, and should be reviewed to create a better method of inspecting suspicious
areas.