Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-402_h315.pdf
Page Number: 115.0

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

17 

GORSUCH, J., dissenting 

functionally compelled by the demands of modern life, and 
in that way the fact that we store data with third parties
may  amount  to  a  sort  of  involuntary  bailment  too.    See 
ante,  at  12–13  (majority  opinion);  Riley  v.  California,  573 
U. S. ___, ___ (2014) (slip op., at 9).
  Third,  positive  law  may  help  provide  detailed  guidance
on  evolving  technologies  without  resort  to  judicial  intui-
tion.  State (or sometimes federal) law often creates rights
in both tangible and intangible things.  See Ruckelshaus v. 
Monsanto Co., 467 U. S. 986, 1001 (1984).  In the context 
of  the  Takings  Clause  we  often  ask  whether  those  state-
created rights are sufficient to make something someone’s
property  for  constitutional  purposes.    See  id.,  at  1001– 
1003;  Louisville  Joint  Stock  Land  Bank  v.  Radford,  295 
U. S.  555,  590–595  (1935).  A  similar  inquiry  may  be
appropriate  for  the  Fourth  Amendment.    Both  the  States 
and federal government are actively legislating in the area
of  third  party  data  storage  and  the  rights  users  enjoy.
See,  e.g.,  Stored  Communications  Act,  18  U. S. C.  §2701 
et seq.;  Tex.  Prop.  Code  Ann.  §111.004(12)  (West  2017) 
(defining  “[p]roperty”  to  include  “property  held  in  any
digital  or  electronic  medium”).  State  courts  are  busy 
expounding  common  law  property  principles  in  this  area
as well.  E.g., Ajemian v. Yahoo!, Inc., 478 Mass. 169, 170, 
84  N. E.  3d  766,  768  (2017)  (e-mail  account  is  a  “form  of 
property  often  referred  to  as  a  ‘digital  asset’ ”);  Eysoldt  v. 
ProScan Imaging, 194 Ohio App. 3d 630, 638, 2011–Ohio–
2359,  957  N. E.  2d  780,  786  (2011)  (permitting  action  for 
conversion of web account as intangible property).  If state 
legislators or state courts say that a digital record has the 
attributes  that  normally  make  something  property,  that
may  supply  a  sounder  basis  for  judicial  decisionmaking
than judicial guesswork about societal expectations. 

Fourth, while positive law may help establish a person’s
Fourth  Amendment  interest  there  may  be  some  circum-
stances  where  positive  law  cannot  be  used  to  defeat  it.