October Term 2014 · Docket 13-1175

Must hotels show guest records to police without a warrant?

The city seeks to inspect hotel logs without a warrant. The hotel company demands a judicial order first.

Official caption
Los Angeles v. Patel
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    The city argues inspections deter serious crimes.

    The hotel company argues inspections need a warrant.

    justice_sotomayor_questioned_if_the_search_purpose_is_administrative

    justice_ginsburg_questioned_if_police_need_reasonable_suspicion

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Los Angeles requires hotels to keep guest records. Police can inspect these logs without a warrant. The hotel company argues this violates privacy rights. The city claims this tool deters crime.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 3, 2015.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The city wants to inspect hotel logs without a warrant.

The hotel company wants a judge to approve inspections first.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The city argues inspections deter trafficking and prostitution.

The hotel company argues inspections require a judicial order.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked if the search purpose is administrative.

Justice Ginsburg asked if police need reasonable suspicion.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines police access to private business records. It balances public safety against individual privacy rights. The outcome shapes how cities monitor commercial spaces.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON