The issue of digital privacy has been particularly significant in recent years as technology has continued to advance. First, many people believe that digital privacy does not exist, nor should it exist, and that the government should be able to search anyone's computer or device at any other time. Others may disagree with this statement and suggest that people should have the right to privacy on their digital devices. Furthermore, they may argue that the government should not be able to access digital devices at all times. Americans who care about their digital freedoms should also ask tough questions about government access to their devices. Digital privacy is a problem today and the issue should be resolved constitutionally, with several cases to support it. Privacy rights are incorporated into the Fourth Amendment, which states that citizens are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. But the Patriot Act, passed after 9/11, allows the FBI to acquire telecommunications, financial and credit data without a court order. Additionally, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 2008 protects U.S. public and private companies from being sued by their customers when they comply with illegal government surveillance requests. These acts have provided laws that either protect or not protect citizens' privacy on their personal digital devices. The most notable act was the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, enacted in 1986. The ECPA identified standards for law enforcement access to electronic communications and data, offering privacy protection to people who use today emerging technologies. Communication... half of the document... investigators obtained from your bank. He argued that he had an expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment. The sentence was then withheld by the Supreme Court because it was ascertained that the checks and deposit slips sent to the banks actually circulate freely within the institution. The result is that Miller actually had no reasonable expectation of privacy. Law enforcement also did not need a search warrant to acquire the data. The second case was Smith v. Maryland. Patricia McDonough was robbed in Baltimore, Maryland on March 5, 1976. After being robbed she notified the police with a brief description of the robber and believed the robber was driving a 1975 Monte Carlo. After a few days she began receiving phone calls anonymous ones that seemed threatening. The caller told her to stand on the porch where she had initially observed the same car from Monte Carlo go by.