View this email in your browser ([link removed])
The Moses case is your best shot to - once and for all - keep cops away from your car, while it's parked at your home.


** A fun story
------------------------------------------------------------

We’ve been sponsoring and submitting amicus curiae briefs for over two decades. One of our two biggest victories comes with a story...

A libertarian think-tank attorney called after reading one of our briefs. He admired our moxie - our commitment to the cause. He wished he could write an amicus like ours. Then came the zinger...

"But I have to live in the real world."

It was all in good fun – a friend busting my chops. He was inspired to call me because he imagined how the Supreme Court clerks would react to reading our brief, and it made him laugh.

NOTE: You might see this amicus brief message TWICE. We plan to share this message with both Agenda Setters by Downsize DC and Zero Aggression Project subscribers.

Please don't be mad at him. I jabbed back about how un-principled his brief was. On top of that…


** I got the last laugh!
------------------------------------------------------------

The case was Antoine Jones v. United States (2012), a Fourth Amendment case.

The Supreme Court had gradually diminished the property basis of the Fourth Amendment. In 1968, they finally killed it. Justice Brennan invented the "expectation of privacy" doctrine. For the next 44 years, right up through my friend's call, "living in the real world" seemingly required all petitioners and amici to make their cases on that privacy basis.

But we told the high court that they'd gone off the rails and it was time to fix it.

AND THEY DID!

In Jones, the Court restored the property baseline - the doctrine that you have a property interest in your person, house, papers, and effects. Our amicus brief was the only one to make that request ([link removed]) .

A year later, the court underlined their position in the Jardines case.

Our argument was so bold, it was easy for smart people to think it was a crazy waste of time and money.

We’ve stayed in the Fourth Amendment game, filing amicus briefs in key follow-on cases – most notably Collins v. Virginia – and reaffirm lawful-access limits.

That's why Mr. Moses's attorneys requested that we – you included – file an amicus in his case.


**
------------------------------------------------------------


** Today, we bring you the Moses case
------------------------------------------------------------

The case is Ronell Moses, Jr v. United States, a petition to the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, for a writ of certiorari (we're asking them to hear the case). With your help, we hope to file an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief.

A police officer followed Ronell Moses home. Then, the cop walked up his residential driveway (shown in the photos here) and searched a car parked by the steps to Moses's front porch. The officer's search relied on probable cause, after entering the property without a warrant.


**
Why the Moses case matters
------------------------------------------------------------
The district court said that slice of driveway wasn’t part of the home’s curtilage (defined below). A divided appeals court agreed, adopting an “objective officer” lens that discounts how a family actually uses that space. But…

That rule turns lived-in home ground into a legal gray zone. If it looks like “parking,” it can be treated like public space.



** Why we should be the ones to press it
------------------------------------------------------------
We know how to fix this!
* With your help, we caused the restoration of the Fourth Amendment’s property baseline in Jones v. United States. Our amicus urged the Court to return to text and trespass.
* A year later, in the Jardines case, the Supreme underscored that property rights baseline.
* Then, in Collins v. Virginia ([link removed]) , we FIRST urged the high court to review the case, and THEN filed another brief on the merits. There, we pressed the concept of curtilage and lawful-access limits that protect vehicles on private property.

Curtilage is an area of land around your house and forming one enclosure with it. But…

In Moses's case, the lower courts have issued opinions that look a lot more like the previously shrinking "expectation of privacy."

Please notice: Just because you win a landmark decision doesn't mean the lower courts will abide by it. They were trained in the old ways, so we must continue. Our role is to teach and reinforce Fourth Amendment concepts such as...

An “automobile” cannot become a talisman before which the Fourth Amendment fades.

Our Moses amicus will include clear, compelling arguments like...
* Make actual use count. Remember, curtilage protects “the area adjacent to the home to which home life extends.” Courts must consider evidence of that real, lived use - not just what an officer noticed in a hurried moment.
* The near-house driveway is curtilage. The zone at the porch steps or door – often bounded by hedges, walls, or the house itself – is functionally part of the home.
* Visibility is not a warrant. Seeing a car from the street does not equal lawful access to enter and search it. Plain view still requires a lawful vantage and lawful access.
* End the “automobile talisman” loophole. Consistent with precedents already listed, the automobile exception stops at the property line. Get a warrant.

By the way, other circuits have gotten this mostly right. The Court should restore a single national standard. We believe this makes the odds of success for this brief high, if you can help us file it.


**
Next steps
------------------------------------------------------------
We’re drafting a bold, principle-first amicus brief to carry these arguments to the Justices, just as we've done all along. To complete this mission, we need you.

To be successful, we usually need at least one $1,000 donor or two $500 donors, along with about three-dozen more donors of various amounts. Please choose which role is right for you.

The average contribution is $55, but any amount you give will help. You can also start a monthly pledge, which enables us to say yes to future briefs.

I Support the Brief ([link removed])
Note: We’re requesting your support via Downsize DC Foundation’s “Zero Aggression Project.” By using the ZAP form, your donation can be tax-deductible.

We can capitalize on our Jones and Collins track record. If you believe your driveway is part of your home, please chip in today.

Thank you in advance for your participation!

Set your own agenda,

Jim Babka, President
Agenda Setters by Downsize DC

============================================================
** Today's Action: Contribute to fund an amicus brief in the case United States v. Ronell Moses ([link removed])
Every issue of this newsletter appears on the blog too - sometimes with a modified title. That blog post also gets shared on the Downsize DC Facebook page. Facebook will expose that post to more people if you leave a reaction (Like), a comment, or (especially if you) Share it.
** Twitter ([link removed])
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
Copyright © 2025 DownsizeDC.org, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website

Our mailing address is:
DownsizeDC.org
872 Mark Drive
Akron, OH 44313
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]