As seen on FourthAmendment.com:
“First, the court concludes that, under the Colorado Constitution, the defendant has a constitutionally protected privacy interest in his Google search history even when revealed only in connection with his IP address and not his name and that, under both the Colorado Constitution and the Fourth Amendment, he also has a constitutionally protected possessory interest in that same history. Second, the court concludes that the defendant’s Google search history implicates his right to freedom of expression; thus, the constitutional protections must be applied with ‘scrupulous exactitude.’ Zurcher v. Stanford Daily, 436 U.S. 547, 564 (1978) (quoting Stanford v. Texas, 379 U.S. 476, 485 (1965)). Third, a majority of the court concludes that the warrant at issue adequately particularized the place to be searched and the things to be seized. Fourth, the majority assumes without deciding that the warrant required individualized probable cause and that its absence here rendered the warrant constitutionally defective. Finally, the majority concludes that law enforcement obtained and executed the warrant in good faith, so the evidence shouldn’t be suppressed under the exclusionary rule.” People v. Seymour, 2023 CO 53, 2023 Colo. LEXIS 991 (Oct. 16, 2023)
Wow.
Read more about the ruling with excerpts at FourthAmendment.com.