In late 2018, a New Hampshire judge ordered Amazon.com LLC to hand over private data from an Echo smart speaker device located in a house where the alleged double murder of Christine Sullivan and Jenna Pellegrini took place. Prosecutors believed that the Echo device might have contained useful information that could help make a case against the prime suspect Timothy Verrill. However, this case alongside others raises concerns regarding the ease with which law enforcement agencies are able to access private data from one’s home. With the rise in popularity of smart home technologies, police are gaining access to data stored on companies’ remote clouds without proving probable cause. In many cases, police are able to access the needed data by serving the companies a subpoena, a court order, or by completing a form on the company’s website. In fact, Amazon has a webpage where law enforcement can fill out a form to get access to data without userconsent. In 2022, Amazon handed over eleven Ring doorbell captured videos to law enforcement through this “consentless shortcut.”

     When the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was passed in 1791, it was primarily regarded as a response to the English rule whereby British officials could conduct warrantless searches of citizens’ homes. To prevent similar abuses by the new American government, and to respect the highly regarded value of privacy, the Fourth Amendment required searches and seizures to be supported by a judge-issued warrant, based on probable cause. However, the modern home today does not resemble the home that the Founders knew when passing the Fourth Amendment. Instead of looking through peepholes to see who’s standing at the door, Americans can now open an application on their phone that’s connected to a smart doorbell camera. Instead of calling the weather station, Alexa and Google Assistant are always on standby ready to answer the most intricate questions. Instead of stoking a fireplace, smart thermostats allow homeowners to control the temperature of their house from miles away. While these technologies provide users with convenience, they also export massive amounts of data to third-party servers. The Fourth Amendment, once regarded as the protector of American homes’ sanctity, is now unable to keep up with the latest technological advancements.

     This piece contends that the variety and complexity of smart home technologies afford a nuanced response to the collision between the Fourth Amendment and the third-party doctrine. Part I discusses the landscape and varieties of current smart home technology. Part II explains how smart home technology has already been labeled as invasive in the consumer data protection world through enforcement orders and lawsuits. Part III surveys the relevant intersecting lines of the Fourth Amendment regarding the jurisprudence generally, technological advancements, and the third-party doctrine. Part IV demonstrates that the variety of smart home technology warrants Fourth Amendment protection in some cases and not others.