What is required to justify a wiretap under federal law?

To justify a wiretap under federal law, it is essential to demonstrate probable cause that a crime is occurring or is about to occur, coupled with the requirement that other investigative methods have been exhausted and proven to be ineffective. This two-pronged standard is established under Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, which governs the use of electronic surveillance.

The rationale behind requiring probable cause ensures that law enforcement has a sufficient basis, backed by facts and evidence, before intruding on an individual's privacy. Additionally, the exhaustion of other investigative techniques signifies that a wiretap is a measure of last resort, reflecting a legislative intent to limit invasive surveillance and protect civil liberties. This requirement prevents broad or unfounded invasions of privacy and promotes accountability and judicial oversight.

In contrast, other options do not meet the legal criteria necessary for a wiretap. Consent from the individual being tapped, while relevant in certain contexts, does not replace the need for probable cause and the exhaustion of prior methods. General suspicions of criminal activity do not provide the necessary legal threshold for surveillance. Lastly, mere approval from a police officer lacks the judicial review component required under federal law, which mandates court oversight to safeguard individuals' rights.