No. 25-7146

James Perrin v. United States

Lower Court: Third Circuit
Docketed: 2026-04-06
Status: Pending
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: criminal-procedure electronic-surveillance fourth-amendment prosecutorial-delegation title-iii wiretap-authority
Latest Conference: N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)

Congress designed the federal wiretap law, enacted as Title III of a 1968 crime bill, to restrain law enforcement's interception of private communications to listen for evidence of crime. Among the law's central safeguards is the limitation of authority to apply for a wiretap order to a select group of high-ranking officials in the Department of Justice or, in state cases, to a jurisdiction's "principal prosecuting attorney." The circuits and state high courts have split as to whether Title III permits a state or county's top prosecutor to delegate this power.

Whether the "principal prosecuting attorney of any State, or the principal prosecuting attorney of any political subdivision thereof," 18 U.S.C. § 2516(2), may delegate responsibility for determining that a wiretap will abide constitutional and statutory limitations and is warranted in the interest of sound law enforcement.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the principal prosecuting attorney under 18 U.S.C. § 2516(2) may delegate authority to apply for wiretap orders

Docket Entries

2026-04-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 6, 2026)
2026-02-22
Application (25A935) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until April 1, 2026.
2026-02-18
Application (25A935) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 2, 2026 to April 1, 2026, submitted to Justice Alito.

Attorneys

James Perrin
Keith M. DonoghueFederal Community Defender Office for the EDPA, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent