Posted by Kromey at 2:09pm Feb 22 '12The Supreme Court unanimously ruled last month (not sure why it just came up in a newsletter today, as opposed to, say, last month's newsletter...) that Obama's Justice Department's argument in favor of warrantless GPS tracking is hogwash. They were split on the reasons why, but did agree that it was a violation of the Fourth Amendment's protections against "unreasonable searches and seizures".
The case centers around a Washington, D.C., nightclub owner that the cops began to suspect was dealing cocaine. They put a GPS tracker on his vehicle and tracked him for 28 days before they arrested him and won a conviction and life sentence. Which was promptly thrown out by the appeals court on the grounds that the GPS tracker violated his Fourth Amendment rights, a conclusion the highest court has now ruled they agree with.
One of the Obama administration's main arguments was the SCOTUS' decision in United States v. Knotts, in which beepers called "bird dogs" were attached to a truck in order to follow its movements; the Justices ruled that Knotts didn't apply, since in that case the government had the truck owner's approval, something they lacked in this case.
The Justice Department also argued that they had "probable cause" for the trackers, but the SCOTUS dismissed that as being insufficient: "We hold that the government's installation of a GPS device on a target's vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle's movements, constitutes a 'search,'" Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the five-justice majority.
Supreme Court Court Rejects Willy-Nilly GPS Tracking (Wired)
Justices Say GPS Tracker Violated Privacy Rights (The New York Times)
Three thoughts on U.S. v. Jones (Concurring Opinions) [Excellent discussion of the decision and its implications.]
The case centers around a Washington, D.C., nightclub owner that the cops began to suspect was dealing cocaine. They put a GPS tracker on his vehicle and tracked him for 28 days before they arrested him and won a conviction and life sentence. Which was promptly thrown out by the appeals court on the grounds that the GPS tracker violated his Fourth Amendment rights, a conclusion the highest court has now ruled they agree with.
One of the Obama administration's main arguments was the SCOTUS' decision in United States v. Knotts, in which beepers called "bird dogs" were attached to a truck in order to follow its movements; the Justices ruled that Knotts didn't apply, since in that case the government had the truck owner's approval, something they lacked in this case.
The Justice Department also argued that they had "probable cause" for the trackers, but the SCOTUS dismissed that as being insufficient: "We hold that the government's installation of a GPS device on a target's vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle's movements, constitutes a 'search,'" Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the five-justice majority.
"People disclose the phone numbers that they dial or text to their cellular providers; the URLs that they visit and the e-mail addresses with which they correspond to their Internet service providers; and the books, groceries and medications they purchase to online retailers," [Justice Sotomayor] wrote [in her concurring opinion]. "I, for one, doubt that people would accept without complaint the warrantless disclosure to the government of a list of every Web site they had visited in the last week, or month, or year."As, Wired notes,
The last time the high court considered the Fourth Amendment, technology and privacy in a big-ticket case was a decade ago, when the justices ruled that the authorities must obtain search warrants to employ thermal-imaging devices to detect indoor marijuana-growing operations, saying the imaging devices carry the potential to "shrink the realm of guaranteed privacy."
Supreme Court Court Rejects Willy-Nilly GPS Tracking (Wired)
Justices Say GPS Tracker Violated Privacy Rights (The New York Times)
Three thoughts on U.S. v. Jones (Concurring Opinions) [Excellent discussion of the decision and its implications.]
Privacy and civil rights trump Obama! - Kromey