Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Holding that courts are not required "to credit a complaint's conclusory statements without reference to its factual context"

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

Jones v. Bock

Holding that PLRA exhaustion is mandatory, and prisoners cannot bring unexhausted claims into federal court

United States v. Jones

Holding that installation of a tracking device was "a physical intrusion would have been considered a 'search' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when it was adopted"

Fla. Avocado Growers v. Paul

Holding federal regulation concerning maturity of avocados did not preempt California regulation, where it was not impossible for growers to comply with both regulations

Griggs-Ryan v. Smith

Holding that "implied consent" is inferred from circumstances indicating that party knowingly agreed to surveillance

U.S. v. Warshak

Holding that government violated Fourth Amendment when, without warrant, it compelled internet service provider to surrender contents of user emails

Faulkner v. ADT Sec. Servs., Inc.

Holding that a communication is confidential under § 632 only when a party "has an objectively reasonable expectation that the conversation is not being overheard or recorded"

Hill v. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

Holding that students' consent to drug tests as a condition of participating in athletics barred their privacy claims

Wayne v. DHL Worlwide Express

Holding that the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 does not provide a basis for federal jurisdiction under the complete preemption doctrine

Section 2510 - Definitions

Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"

Section 2511 - Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited

Imposing a penalty on persons who “intentionally intercept ... any wire, oral, or electronic communication”

Section 2701 - Unlawful access to stored communications

Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"

Section 2516 - Authorization for interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications

Listing the executive officers who may authorize a wiretap application

Section 2707 - Civil action

Granting relief to those "aggrieved by any violation of this chapter in which the conduct constituting the violation is engaged in with a knowing or intentional state of mind"

Section 2702 - Voluntary disclosure of customer communications or records

Restricting use of Internet subscriber information without consent

Section 630 - Legislative declarations

Holding that an eavesdropper is liable when recording or listening in "without the consent of all parties"

Section 631 - Unlawful tapping

Prohibiting "any person who . . . makes any unauthorized connection . . . or who willfully and without the consent of all parties to the communication . . . reads, or attempts to read, or to learn the contents or meaning of any message is in transit or passing over any wire, line, or cable . . . "

Section 637 - Unlawful disclosure of contents of telegraphic or telephonic message