Nathan Freed Wessler (
https://www.aclu.org/bio/nathan-freed-wessler) is Deputy Director of the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, and he also successfully argued at the Supreme Court against warrantless access to cell phone location information (
Carpenter v. US, 2018). Nate joined the Pol 153 class to discuss Carpenter, looming threats to privacy, political advocacy for new legislation, and advice for students interested in working in rights-related fields.
Question timeline:
0:19-1:33 -- (Introduction) Nate Wessler, ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology
Project
1:40-2:10 -- (Frivolity) Nate’s missing SCOTUS Quill
2:14-5:20 -- (Litigation) Experience of arguing at SCOTUS
5:32-9:22 -- (Career) Nate’s path from undergraduate to ACLU litigator
9:34-12:10 -- (Litigation) Why narrow argument re: 3rd party
doctrine?
12:22-14:50 -- (Litigation) Why weren't there more liberal concurring opinions?
14:55-17:50 -- (Doctrine) Should SCOTUS reconsider the Katz doctrine (i.e. ask about a “reasonable
expectation of privacy”?)
17:55-21:00 -- (Big picture) What is the biggest threat today to 4th Amendment
protections?
21:04-24:58 -- (Reproductive Rights) Privacy threats of new state anti-abortion laws post-Dobbs
25:12-28:08 -- (Big Picture) Why should non-criminals care about surveillance?
28:10-32:06 -- (Legislation) Why is there such difficulty in passing laws that
protect privacy? (E.g. update ECPA, pass The 4th Amendment is not
for Sale bill)
32:10-35:25 -- (Legislation/Litigation) When to focus on legislation, when on litigation
35:26-40:00 -- (Culture) Why are so many Americans so hyper concerned
about privacy?
40:02-43:20 -- (Speech + Privacy) What tensions between free speech and privacy
values? How balance them?
43:25-46:30 -- (Future) What’s next? What case should we be watching? (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/moore-v-united-states-2/)
46:35-48:45 -- (Career) Advice for: 1) students interested in law school,
2) students NOT interested in law but in
rights
