United States v. Adam Blocker

── United States v. Adam Blocker ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Date: May 05, 2026 Category: General In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-1536 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ADAM BLOCKER, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 20 CR 704 — Virginia M. Kendall, Chief Judge. ____________________ ARGUED FEBRUARY 12, 2026 — DECIDED MAY 5, 2026 ____________________ Before EASTERBROOK, PRYOR, and MALDONADO, Circuit Judges. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge. Dropbox stores customers’ data on its own servers or space furnished by other firms. Peo- ple can use Dropbox to synchronize files across multiple de- vices, back up data, offload data to the cloud and free up local storage, and share files with others. 2 No. 25-1536 Access to Dropbox is contingent on agreement to its terms of service. One term provides that “Your Stuff” (the users’ data) belongs to the user: Dropbox disclaims authorship, ownership, or any right to publish the information. Another term provides that Dropbox may examine the data to ensure that it is not being used for illegal purposes, such as fraud, copyright infringement, or obscenity. A third term adds: We may disclose your information to third parties if we determine that such disclosure is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with any applicable law, regulation, legal process, or appropriate gov- ernment request; (b) protect any person from death or serious bodily injury; (c) prevent fraud or abuse of Dropbox or our users; (d) protect Dropbox’s rights, property, safety, or interest; or (e) perform a task carried out in the public interest. In 2018 Dropbox informed the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC or the Center) that it had found child pornography in files that Adam Blocker was shar- ing with third persons. It sent the files to the Center, which alerted federal authorities. The FBI obtained a search warrant for Blocker’s computers and storage, including the data at Dropbox. The search located child porn in addition to the im- ages that Dropbox had sent to the Center. Blocker pleaded guilty to two counts related to child pornography, 18 U.S.C. §2252A(a), reserving the right to contest on appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress the evidence. He is serving a term of 120 months’ imprisonment. Blocker’s main problem is that the Fourth Amendment, on which he relies, applies only to searches and seizures by pub- lic officials. United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 113 (1984). Private searches and seizures are outside its scope, and Drop- box is a private entity. Blocker observes, however, that the Center holds a charter from the United States, receives public No. 25-1536 3 money, and has been designated as the national clearing- house for reports of child pornography. 18 U.S.C. §2258A. At least one court of appeals has held that this makes the Center part of the government. United States v. Ackerman, 831 F.3d 1292, 1296–1300 (10th Cir. 2016) (Gorsuch, J.). Contra, United States v. Meals, 21 F.4th 903, 908 (5th Cir. 2021). Our decision in United States v. Bebris, 4 F.4th 551, 558 (7th Cir. 2021), as- sumes that Ackerman is correct, and we do the same today (without deciding the point). Blocker observes that Dropbox promised to tell the Center when it detects child porn on its servers. The Center agreed in exchange to furnish Dropbox with software that would assist in detection. This means, Blocker insists, that Dropbox’s acts are fairly attributable to the United States and so are g