Home » Members Posts » Supreme Court: Warrants needed in GPS tracking

Supreme Court: Warrants needed in GPS tracking

 

Supreme Court: Warrants needed in GPS tracking

Dear Readers, I applaud this win for WTP but it doesn't address all the other privacy violations as detailed in many of my previous posts that are detailed at the end of this post. Freedom's blessings, Dona Witmer

By , Updated: Monday, January 23, 12:32 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-warrants-needed-in-gps-tracking/2012/01/23/gIQAx7qGLQ_story.html

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that police must obtain a search warrant before using a GPS device to track criminal suspects. But the justices left for another day larger questions about how technology has altered a person's expectation of privacy.

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the government needed a valid warrant before attaching a GPS device to the Jeep used by D.C. drug kingpin Antoine Jones, who was convicted in part because police tracked his movements on public roads for 28 days

"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' " under the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, Scalia wrote.

All justices agreed with the outcome of the case, which affirmed a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that said evidence of Jones' s frequent trips to a stash house where drugs and nearly $1 million in cash were found must be thrown out.

The police had obtained a warrant for GPS surveillance of Jones, but it expired before they attached the device to his car.

But there was a significant split on the court about whether Monday's decision went far enough.

Scalia's majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor, said the electronic surveillance, if achieved without having to physically trespass on Jones's property, may have been "an unconstitutional invasion of privacy."

But Scalia added: "The present case does not require us to answer that question."

It was that question – society's expectation of privacy in a modern world – that had animated the court's consideration of the case. In an intense hour-long oral argument last November, the Big Brother of George Orwell's novel "1984" was referenced six times.

The justices pondered a world in which satellites can zero in on an individual's house, cameras can record the faces at a crowded intersection and individuals can instantly announce their every movement to the world on Facebook. They wondered about the government placing tracking devices in overcoats or on license plates.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said the decision also should have settled some of those questions instead of deciding a case about a "21st-century surveillance technique" by using "18th-century tort law."

"The court's reasoning largely disregards what is really important (the use of a GPS for the purpose of long-term tracking) and instead attaches great significance to something that most would view as relatively minor (attaching to the bottom of a car a small, light object that does not interfere in any way with the car's operation)," Alito wrote.

Alito's point was that it was the lengthy GPS surveillance of Jones itself that violated the Fourth Amendment and that "the use of longer term GPS monitoring in investigations of most offenses impinges on expectations of privacy."

"For such offenses," he wrote, "society's expectation has been that law enforcement agents and others would not – and indeed, in the main, simply could not – secretly monitor and catalogue every single movement of an individual's car for a very long period."

The key to the court's more narrow decision on the case seemed to be Sotomayor. She praised Alito's "incisively" written concurrence but indicated it might not have gone far enough.

"People reveal a great deal of information about themselves to third parties in the court of carrying out mundane tasks," Sotomayor wrote. Perhaps people come to see a "diminution of privacy" as inevitable, Sotomayor said.

"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."

But, she said, "resolution of these difficult questions" is unnecessary because she agreed with the majority that the government's "physical intrusion on Jones' Jeep" supplies a narrower avenue to decide the case.

The case is United States v. Jones.

Other Posts: Gun Control: NYPD and Pentagon to place mobile Terahertz Imagining body detectors on the streets on NYC , FBI Announces Creation of Biometric Database "Next Generation Identification"–people's bodies will become de facto national identification cards ,  Police State is here! Smile, you're on drone-craft camera. Drones cleared for domestic use across the US  , 1 out of 2 Americans Believe Government is a Threat to Freedom  , Globalization of US Drone Warfare: Risk-Free And Above The Law: U.S. , Naked eye: hidden cameras more common than you think? , Think tank slams plan for biometric database in Israel: If implemented, Interior Ministry will convert Israelis' identity cards into smart cards with digital chips storing biometric data., FBI Agents Train Garbage Collectors To Report Suspicious Activity ,   DHS & Walmart team up in VIPER Program: Walmart encourages spying on neighbors — Start of Obama?s Nazi-like Civilian Security Force? Feds Plotted Invasion of Social Media , Homeland Security Recruiting Neighborhood Busybodies as Informants ,  US doles out millions for street cameras: through DHS ,  Pennsylvania Homeland Security office engaged in domestic surveillance, compared political groups to Al Qaeda , We're not stalking people, we're just trying to improve service, Apple tells Congress hearing on privacy  , UK National Identity Register DESTROYED, ID Cards are SCRAPPED, Sam Rohrer on REAL ID: CONNECTING THE DOTS TO AN INTERNATIONAL ID, Opposition Forces In Pennsylvania Moving On REAL ID: Sen. Folmer introduces bill SB 354, Gov. Corbett, PennDOT not talking , PA REAL ID Update–PennDOT is Violating our Right to Privacy!,  University receives Department of Defense grant to grow bomb-sniffing plants,  Fox News: Spanish Researchers Want to Tag Human Embryos With Bar Codes ,White House: Science of man-made life can proceed–read "tinkering with our DNA";Federal Judge Blocks Federal Funding of Embryonic Stem Cell Research; How to Remake Life: Venter Institute Researchers have made the first viable cell with a synthetic Genome. ; The F.D.A. is Using a Unique G.M.O. Salmon Approval Process to Bypass U.S. Regulations; Soylent Green? First Human Embryonic Stem Cell Test Begins; Cancer 'is purely man-made' say scientists after finding almost no trace of disease in Egyptian mummies; Bio-Piracy: Colgate Accused of Stealing Thousand-Year-Old Toothpaste; Bio – Piracy: Gene Giants Stockpile Patents on "Climate-Ready" Crops in Bid to Become Biomasters; DNA barcoding aims to protect species, food — Call it a DNA digital Dewey Decimal System for all life on Earth.; Will US Patent Office end gene patent enslavement of the human race?;  Attack of the Zombie Databases: Banks spying on your bills, rent payments, paychecks, Watch Where You're Going: Businesses are quietly buying mobile-phone data to discover the paths that consumers take. ; Who Is Watching You? Nine Industries That Know Your Every Move ; Top Secret America: A hidden world, growing beyond control.


Subscribe

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.