Entick VS Carrington in 1765 was one of the precedents that set the need for the 4th amendment. This was prior to our constitution when the King ran the show. It was determined by the judges that a man's personal private papers were not subject to seizure unless a specific crime had been committed. It was well accepted that a man's home was his castle and his private correspondence was sacred.
This was later determined by the courts when wiretapping came about:
By the laws of England, every invasion of private property, be it ever so minute, is a trespass. No man can set foot upon my ground without my license but he is liable to an action though the damage be nothing . . . .'' Protection of property interests as the basis of the Fourth Amendment found easy acceptance in the Supreme Court 30 and that acceptance controlled decision in numerous cases. 31 For example, in Olmstead v. United States, 32 one of the two premises underlying the holding that wiretapping was not covered by the Amendment was that there had been no actual physical invasion of the defendant's premises; where there had been an invasion, a technical trespass, electronic surveillance was deemed subject to Fourth Amendment restrictions. 33 The Court later rejected this approach, however. ''The premise that property interests control the right of the Government to search and seize has been discredited. . . . We have recognized that the principal object of the Fourth Amendment is the protection of privacy rather than property, and have increasingly discarded fictional and procedural barriers rested on property concepts.'' 34 Thus, because the Amendment ''protects people, not places,'' the requirement of actual physical trespass is dispensed with and electronic surveillance was made subject to the Amendment's requirements
Any violation of this is a violation of our laws. If you know of any police who are doing it I would suggest you turn them in or do something to protect your neighbors from this violation. Because you will be next.