In 2015, the Court decided Grady v. North Carolina, which held: "For purposes of the Fourth Amendment, a state conducts a search when it attaches a device to a person’s body, without consent, to allow it to track that person’s movements." This was a per curiam opinion with no dissenters.
This map goes from Grady back to Carmara v. Municipal Court. This choice of network anchor was based on this quote from Grady, which was reasoning by analogy: "A building inspector who enters a home simply to ensure compliance with civil safety regulations has undoubtedly conducted a search under the Fourth Amendment. See Camara v. Municipal Court,, 387 U. S. 523, 534 (1967) (housing inspections are “administrative searches” that must comply with the Fourth Amendment)."
This network thus features cases that develop the "search" and administrative search" concepts in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. Please note that the embedded map shows the three-degree network using a random projection. Click the map to view other options.