Restore The Fourth

Opposing unconstitutional mass government surveillance



  • Beware of Governments Bearing Contact Tracing Apps

    Providing hospital personnel and the general public with enough tests, masks and hand soap is hard. In-person contact tracing is expensive and risky for the

    Learn More
  • COVID-19 Is A Catastrophe—The Response Could Be Another

    By Alex Marthews and Derick Bellamy The last two months have terrified many in America and across the world. The COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic has spread

    Learn More
  • Restore the Fourth, 18 Allies Ask Congress To Investigate FBI Monitoring

    The essence of the Fourth Amendment is that the government should leave you and your stuff alone, unless they can satisfy a judge that they

    Learn More

RT4 Files Amicus Brief in Micah Jessop Case

In September 2013, police seized hundreds of thousands of dollars from businessmen Micah Jessop and Brittan Ashjian, on suspicions they were running an illegal gambling ring. Despite the fact they were never charged with any crimes, their money has still not been returned, and the court system still hasn’t come to the conclusion that it’s illegal for the police to steal innocent people’s money.

Earlier this month, Restore the Fourth filed an amicus brief in the 9th circuit against this flagrant violation of the Fourth Amendment by the Fresno Police.

Read more about the Micah Jessop case (Courthouse News)
Read more about the Micah Jessop case (San Francisco Chroncile)

Stay updated on the fight for the Fourth Amendment. Follow us on Twitter @Restore_the4th.

Victory in Cambridge!

2-year RT4 & ACLU campaign leads to passage of strong surveillance oversight ordinance

On December 10, 2018, the City of Cambridge, MA became the second jurisdiction on the East Coast to pass a “surveillance oversight ordinance.”

These ordinances were originally developed in 2013 by Restore The Fourth activists in the San Francisco Bay Area, where ordinances have now passed in OaklandBerkeleyDavisPalo AltoSanta Clara County and the Bay Area Rapid Transit Board.

A surveillance oversight ordinance is a simple way for local people to take control over the surveillance technologies being deployed against them. Surprisingly, the default in most cities and towns is that police can borrow, acquire, or deploy any surveillance technology without even letting elected officials know, let alone asking their permission beforehand.

This is how these ordinances work. For any surveillance technology – broadly defined – that a local agency wants to deploy, they have to present a plan for how it will be used and what will happen to the data to the local elected officials, who will concurrently decide whether to approve the technology and the plan. Then, if approved, the deploying agency has to report back regularly to the elected officials on whether actual use matches planned use. If it doesn’t, there are penalties.

Congratulations should go to Digital Fourth / RT4-Boston and to the ACLU of Massachusetts. According to organizer Alex Marthews, “We’re delighted to see this pass, and pass unanimously. We hope to see other strong ordinances pass in other Massachusetts cities and towns.”