◆ SpookStack

Ta eee i a Salt mae mela Rae ce das ate ine lh ” Footnotes (Continay _ yO i) + ' . , . ] 16. Katz v. United States, 389 U, 8, 347 (1967). 17. “Td, at 353. See also Silverman v. United States, : - 365 U. S. 505, 511 (1560). ~ —— 18. 407 U, §, 297 (1972). So oe 19, Jd, at 321-22. | 20, ~ United Statesv. Clay, 430 F. ‘24 1165 (5th Cir. 1970); = United States v. Brown, 484 F. 2d 418 (5th Cir, 1973); pe United fiates v. ietenko, 494 F, 2d 593 (3d Cir. 1974); BE: United States v. ilolrman, 3834 F. Supp. 504 (D. D.C. 1971). SS Note, however, that on 6/23/75, in Zweibon v. Mitchell, Fi (D.C.C. No, 73-1847) Circuit Judge J. Skelly Wright Ex expressed the view, by dictum, that the President, excert Ee. possibly in emerzency Situations, may not legally ‘authorize “a the installation of warrantless electronic surveillance even zz when directed against foreign powers or their agents, ae | supra. 22. 484 F, ad. at 426, 23. supra. a 24, 494 F, 2d, at 602, 25, supra, 26. 376 F.Supp. 29 (D.D.C, 1974). 2%, ; Brief for the United States at 31. 28; 376 F. Supp. at 33, ee rr Sf 30. | Memorandum for the United States as amicus curiae at 1-2.