Using that evidence, they acquired a search warrant, found more than 100 marijuana plants and arrested Kyllo. He said the evidence was illegally obtained because the warrant was issued partly on the basis of the thermal imaging results, and the imaging itself constituted a search conducted without a warrant, in violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. However, more than the law enforcement officers' eyes were involved in the scan of Kyllo's home that was conducted from the street and took only a few minutes. But, then, such eavesdropping is, in a sense, a contradiction in terms. This may not have been nice, but neither was it invasive.
Privacy is neither an easily identifiable thing , like the Grand Canyon, nor an absolute value.
However, the concern of the Constitution's Framers for protecting privacy began by assuming that privacy of the home is the most precious and most easily defined sort. Congress is about to step onto the dark and bloody ground of the judicial confirmation process. The decision in the Kyllo case should, but probably will not, cause these critics second, or perhaps first, thoughts. JWR contributor George Will's column by clicking here.