of betsy the vast department of education or scott pruitt. and these people who are essentially trying to dismantle government oversight from within is regulators people that are jeff's. hundreds of thousands and then you add to it's much a slate of gambits like the top. this recent bank lobbyist. partial repeal of the dogs they've been on their wish list for ages the stuff thousands tens of thousands of lobbyist essentially are writing the legislation every once in a while a bill will be submitted and the the lobbying firms name will be on it because the congressman messed up you know by not taking it off my question represented god well somewhat mirrors would represent money i'm just curious does it have does the legislation have some connection to alec this bill didn't come to me from alec in answer to your question but the reason i ask is because earlier you passed out a handout that says got walt at the top and it says health care compact and there's a logo right in the middle of that page and i went to the elec website and there is exac

if you want to see a phone booth you can go to scott pruitt's office. , but my question is so katz said that the fourth amendment protects people, not places. but you have to decide what kind of interests are protected by privacy. justice scalia in the heat sensor case said it also protects property. you cannot go look through a house with a heat sensor. but outside of that, there is the chief case of needing a warrant for wiretaps. there is not much about what is protected by privacy. we have these big holes that's a meta-data can be captured it seems like the supreme court is not really keeping up with all of the advances. we have these devices that go to cell towers -- police have scanners, there's no protection against, that the court has taken -- is their chance will get a solution to those kinds of problems from this court? >> great question on the one hand, this quarters inspiring in coming up with unanimous decisions, repeatedly saying that you do need warrants before you contract someone 24/7 with a gps device or search someone cell phone on arrest this year, as we will talk ab

so if you want to see a phone boo booth you could go to scott pruitt's office. so like katz said that the fourth amendment protects people not places but the standard is sort of squishy because you have to decide what kind of interests are protected by privacy. and so justice scalia in the heat sensor case said oh, but it also protects property. okay. so you can't go and look through the house for the heat sensor. but outside of that, there is really maybe the keenl case about needing a warrant for wiretaps there is not much that said what is protected by privacy and on the other hand we have these big holes like the pen register cases that say that metadata could be captured, okay, and also like anything that touches a foreign border could be captured or it is been allowed to be captured. so, it seems like the supreme court is not really keeping up with all of the advances, you know. we have these devices that are to cell towers to pick up cell conversations and police men are scanning conversations when they go through neighborhoods and stuff like and there is