Warrantless cell phone searches out. Privacy in.
The Supreme Court has been very busy lately. It seems like they’re getting most of their decisions right these days. They gave Hobby Lobby and a Christian college in Illinois victories over ObamaCare, they ruled against President Obama’s appointments to the National Labor Relations Board that bypassed Congress and they decided that public employees should not be forced to pay union dues.
Now, the Supreme Court has struck a chord for privacy. This comes at a time when there is little privacy left, thanks to the USA Patriot Act that George W. Bush started and Barack Obama expanded. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that police usually need a warrant to search the cell phone of a person they are arresting.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that for many Americans, cell phones hold “the privacies of life.”
He also wrote, “The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought…Since cell phones make it easy to store huge amounts of personal data and communications in someone’s pocket, they’ve seriously changed how much information an arresting officer can find out with an initial search.”
People against this recent decision say that remote wiping and post-arrest data encryption are ways that a person getting arrested can get rid of evidence before police can get a warrant. But the Court ruled that those activities are not done often enough to make a difference.
How do you feel about this Supreme Court decision? Do you agree that police should not be allowed to search the cell phone of someone they are arresting without a warrant, or should that person’s phone be fair game? Let me know what you think.
What part of the IV amendment do people not get? “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.” As far as I can tell, cell phones qualify as effects, and may qualify as ‘papers’ since information is ‘written’ in them. Nowhere do I find that new technology is exempt from protection.
Without going into the details of warrantless searches and other means of illegal intrusion – I’d like to mention a service for email privacy and security – https://www.mailfence.com which indeed provide true end-to-end encryption along with the capability of digital signatures and is based in Belgium (that means – US gag orders, NSL’s doesn’t apply to them).
It surely begs the question of whether modern day police are constitutional themselves (elected sheriffs excepted as long as their term is limited thereby). Look at Roger Roots’ “Are Cops Constitutional” which proves conclusively that they are not. THEN go and find out how few “judges” and other court “officers” are lawfully constituted in that they have never taken their oath or registered their bond. When Bush commented that the Constitution was “just a piece of paper (that may be ignored at will being implied), it may have been shocking and seemingly a lie but far from it. Lincoln may have been the most egregious trailblazer to unlawful government but Washington, with his suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion (and the tax it was based on) certainly set the precedent. If one is truly Judaeo-Christian in that the First Commandment rules your life, then, earthly governments are sin and taking orders from it equally sinful.
The information on your phone is personal and private. If their has been no criminal law has been broken then search is not an option. A warrant cannot be issued by any judge unless probable cause is shown involving criminal action. Illegal search is still illegal according to the Constitution and without an amendment it should stay that way.
NO, police should not be able to get info from cell phones. Invasion of privacy. Police should be put on leave or fired and not allowed to testify in court. Any judge should rule out such.
I think it was a good idea to pass this ruling, BUT. I’m sorry to say. Unless you’re an attorney and can speak about your rights and privacy as it happens. You have no leg to stand on. Police powers go beyond what you believe. Let me ask you this. The Bombing in Boston? The police looked at everything they had on them and off them. Would you respect the rights of a Terrorist? Would you say ” The police can’t look at a terrorist history because it’s private?” HA HA HA . Wake up !! The guy that shot all those people in Colorado. Would you not look at their phone to see who, how and when he probably planed his attack? No you would want to know everything about that guy. What about a child molester? would you be interested in seeing what he has in his or her phone? of course you would. where is their rights??????? The police need only probable cause. That’s all. The police employ hackers to get around all decoding and passwords. They don’t even need a hacker to get into your phone. They can arrest you and take the phone to the lab where they can download all the info and see what’s in it and what they can use to screw you. Wake up to the truth. :)
I believe that a similar ruling was made in Canada a year or so ago, or maybe it was the US. The ruling was that a cell phone left open was no different than leaving your papers out in the open where they could be seen by a passerby. If you dont protect your personal records then you cannot claim violation of privacy. If you protect your phone with a password then this is the same as shielding your privacy and a Warrant is required. In reality this only means that information extracted from a password protected phone (cops have cracking software) cannot be used in evidence. Cops can still use it to identify your contacts, track your locations etc… they just cant introduce it as evidence in a trial. If you want total privacy, careful what you do and avoid cell phones as much as possible.
I don’t pay any bills using my cell phone with the apps. I either mail them in or use the computer.
Do you have the date of this Supreme Court ruling, case number in case name I am very interested in how they wrote this decision. Please post back the information in this Supreme Court decision so I may look it up.
No searches without a warrant. Period. You want to check my cellphone, find a judge.
Most law enforcement officers are not tech savvy enough to get by a simple password protected device. Not saying anything bad about L.E., just saying. So protect your device with a password, and you’ll stop most wandering eyes.
Today is 11 May 2015
Just last week the Supreme Court Handed President Obama and the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice and the National Security Agency a blow for American Rights not to be recorded or have their telephone calls eavesdropped upon nor their E-mails read without a court order. Of course the government contents that this will hamper their ability to fight terrorism. But the Supreme Court ruled that communication within the country requires a court order. However, the Supreme Court also ruled that citizens talking to people outside the country are subject to having their communications recorded.
That is one for our side. It is about time that the government gets the “RUDE AWAKING.” Just think it has been 14 years coming. However, the hard work has just begun; how long is it going to take to reverse all the crap that President Obama laid down before the People these past eight years with his Executive Orders.
Agree totally….now if they just do the right thing and send the decisions for same-sex marriage back to the individual states…and Gingsberg and Kagan recuses themselves.
Glad and agree with this decision.
Not to be cynical, but does anyone believe that the police, when they are in aggressive mode will abide by any of the these rulings, epecially the Feds!
Let me also impart a little story: a professor friend of mine was escorting several visitors from Eastern Europe and several commented that they were surprised by the level police presence they observed, and this was in Southern Ohio in smaller/midsize towns and semi-rural ares and highway situations. This was over ten years ago the presence and intrusion has increased; take it for waht its worth.
Don’t have a cell phone, and have never had one, not to say I ever will, but not likely. I went to the Doctor’s office the other day, and there was about 15 people in there. I could have walked in there with a gun in my hand, and no one would have ever known it. I couldn’t believe it, nobody even looked up. This thing has taken control of everybody’s life. No matter where U go, everybody driving, and even little kids, have a cell phone to there head. Now, there are more car wrecks, from cell phones, than drunk driving. And here in my state, there trying to make the fine, the same as a DUI. I can see where they can be of help, but It has truly taken over peoples lives. I like to know what’s going on around me, it might save your life.
Personally, I think it’s unwise to own a cell phone. I threw my cell phone away 9 or 10 years ago and have not had one since. Don’t miss it at all.
Also, I advise people to remove the tracking device from their automobile. Mechanics may not be allowed to remove it, but there is no law that says a mechanic can’t tell YOU where it is so that you can remove it.
I have no tracking devices on me at all so I can travel in privacy. It’s too bad that people sit back and complain about having no privacy when they can DO something about it.
As far as e-mail is concerned, I have taken steps to protect my privacy there as well. Encryption is not difficult to set up and I believe that before a whole team of snoops try to unravel my mail, they will move on to the next person who has no encryption. Tor is another thing to think about or people who value their privacy. Nothing is GUARANTEED in this life, but as long as you don’t DO anything to protect yourself, you have no right to complain.
Here you guys go a new company that will keep your E-mail safe and secure. It is encrypted to and from your computer. So much so that the company itself can not go into your account and read your E-mails. This company is in Switzerland. This way the NSA, Homeland Security and any other government agency that may want to peek into your life – CAN’T! The name of the company is call ProtonMail. You can look them up on the web at http://www.protonmail.com or at https://protonmail.ch Now this company is in its infancy. It shows a lot a promise. You can sign up but you will have to wait until the company adds more computer hardware to cover the load. The U.S. Government cyber unit isn’t happy about this. They can not crack the encryption. Even if they were able to on the first e-mail they would have to start all over again to see the reply. The IPO address is also encrypted.
Yes, there are flaws with this type of thinking in that it can be used for evil or perverse thinking. But that is the way of things in this world. You make something that can help mankind only to find that some sicko found a way to harm someone. In any case the ball is in our court; yours and mine. Use this new technology responsibly. With great power comes great responsibly, right Spiderman?
So true Linda.. I think if anyone’s dumb enough to put self incriminating data onto their cell phones or e-mails may be dumb enough to help fill all these prisons we’re building. But, it would have some disadvntage against the invasive “Johhny Law” if they were to have to search through all of my wife’s text’s. Meanwhile, the bank robbery ‘cross town goes down without a hitch all because some cop is more interested in what’s in other people’s closets than a real law get’s broken across town. Makes me wonder what’s in theat copj’s closet? Not really, I have a life that tends to take up all of my own life. (-:
Linda, I agree that privacy is of great importance but just in case that you didn’t know or remember that your drivers license will allow a trooper or policeman going the other way to scan your license from their patrol car. I just don’t know if they can read it from a satelite yet. The point is that in my state they have that technology. FYI
Do not for one minute believe you can not be found. When my husband joined the military in the late 70’s there were in place already, satellite images that could read the brand of cigarette he smoked. The government and possibly other governments and groups know you and where you are.
I am happy that the Supreme Court got it right. Think that the police have a little to much power and this puts them right back in Line. As for a search warrant they can specify “text messages, photos, audio files and note pad” on the phone and you are likely to find what you need there. So there can be specific areas to name in a search warrant. I am happy though that they brought it back under control.
I am totally against the invasion of our privacy by tapping email, text, and cell phone conversations without a warrant. On the other hand, in fairness to law enforcement, what makes a cell phone in your pocket any different than a wallet, purse, note pad, or check book? There is a reason equipment (cell phone) vendors offer the ability to “lock” and/or “encrypt” the data stored on your device. If you think using biometrics such as retinal scans and fingerprint recognition will protect your device, think again. There are no laws preventing police from using your body parts to unlock your phone.
This is great, to finallly have someone to say NO W to Obama-pilfering the cookie jar. But I think it’s a little too late and a little too little—and with the powers that are now being given to law enforcement, what makes anyone think they’ll stop to listen? When have they?
My cell phone was confiscated as well as my PC with a warrant from animal control ( of all people) on a fishing expedition to take my animals because a ‘rescue’ wanted them! The animals were ‘auctioned’ without notification of myself or attorney .. No charges have been filed… Guess this is happening all over. Too much power to ‘animal rights groups’ and the ‘wanna be cops’….
Dear Frank,
It is nice to see the Supreme s act like the individual, non=partisan branch of government they were founded to be … protector of “We The People” from Constitutional subversive over reach by government!
Let’s just pray they continue to act on our behalf and not the agenda of this corrupt, Socialist President and his cool-aid drinkers!
“I love my country … but, fear my government!”
God Save America,
Orrin
Since a warrant MUST specify the places to be searched and the items to be seized, unless cell phone in question has been tapped, there is no way for LEOs to obtain a legal search warrant for suspect cell phones.
Finally, something from SCOTUS that makes sense.
One thing people. BEWARE!! If you are stopped by the police and willingly hand over your phone to show the officer your “electronic” insurance ID card, you may very well find you have given up your right to privacy. Simple solution: carry paper or plastic ID cards and never hand over your phone.
It’s about time that the Supreme Court earns its pay for the day. Its been a long time coming. Now they just have to rule on the rest of the crap that has been forced down the American people’s throats.