- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Supreme Court elects to hear case re access to phone location
Posted on 6/5/17 at 11:57 am
Posted on 6/5/17 at 11:57 am
quote:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether the government needs a warrant to obtain information from cellphone companies showing their customers’ locations.
The Supreme Court has limited the government’s ability to use GPS devices to track suspects’ movements, and it has required a warrant to search cellphones.
The new case, Carpenter v. United States, No. 16-402, concerns historical data held by cellphone companies that shows users’ movements over time and could, for instance, place them at the scene of a crime.
quote:
A federal law, the Stored Communications Act, does require prosecutors to go to court to obtain tracking data, but the showing they must make under the law is not probable cause, the standard for a warrant. Instead, they must demonstrate only that there were “specific and articulable facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe” that the records sought “are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.”
In rejecting the argument that the relaxed standard violated the Fourth Amendment, which bans unreasonable searches, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Richmond, Va., for instance, said it was bound by the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Smith case.
“The Supreme Court may in the future limit, or even eliminate, the third-party doctrine,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote for the majority, adding that Congress could require a warrant for historical cell-site location information.
Thought this was interesting for all the legal eagles out there.
NY Times
Posted on 6/5/17 at 12:08 pm to NYNolaguy1
The Supreme Court has been front and center in the destruction of the 4th Amendment over the last 30 years. They are nothing but Ivy League authoritarians who worship state power in all forms.
Posted on 6/5/17 at 12:09 pm to NYNolaguy1
I have been associated with a couple of cases that hinged on this issue. It is very, very interesting and pretty disturbing how easy it is for the government to get information currently.
The laws just haven't caught up with the technology.
As it stands, the courts in this District have pretty consistently ruled that the customer has no expectation of privacy in anything except the actual voice transmission of a conversation. Everything else (who you called, when you called, where you are and where you were, etc) has been ruled "business data" that is the property of the cell company. There are exceptions, before the attorneys come in here quoting cases, but this is largely true. I am pro-police but think they should have something at least approaching probable cause before they go getting all of my phone records and location data.
The laws just haven't caught up with the technology.
As it stands, the courts in this District have pretty consistently ruled that the customer has no expectation of privacy in anything except the actual voice transmission of a conversation. Everything else (who you called, when you called, where you are and where you were, etc) has been ruled "business data" that is the property of the cell company. There are exceptions, before the attorneys come in here quoting cases, but this is largely true. I am pro-police but think they should have something at least approaching probable cause before they go getting all of my phone records and location data.
Popular
Back to top
2






