In the case of US v. Houston, what did appeal courts determine about technological surveillance tools?

The correct answer stems from the legal principle regarding Open Fields Doctrine established in previous cases. In the context of US v. Houston, the appeal courts determined that law enforcement officials can utilize technological surveillance tools in open fields without violating the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches. The rationale is that open fields are not afforded the same level of privacy as a person's home or its immediate surroundings (curtilage). As such, areas categorized as open fields can be monitored using surveillance methods without the need for a warrant. This principle is important for delineating the boundaries of privacy rights in relation to law enforcement practices and the use of technology in surveillance.