https://www.cnet.com/news/supreme-court-says-warrant-necessary-for-phone-location-data/ I know many of you will agree with this decision on the actual issue, but the problem is they had to stand the Fourth Amendment on its head and invent a constitutional right out of whole cloth to get there. The issue concerns cell phone tracking. Providers have records that record the precise location of your phone at all times. Obviously that is incredibly useful information for the police to have, for example in confirming an alibi. They used it to convict a guy and of course, he appealed. The argument was that accessing this data, which importantly is held by the provider, was the sort of search and seizure that triggered the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. The Sixth Circuit disagreed. Traditionally, the Fourth Amendment only applied to the defendant's own property, not records held by third parties unless some other sort of protection, eg attorney/client, applied. The Supreme Court disagreed, per Chief Justice Roberts, a man known for occasional flights of inventive writing, see Obamacare decision. There is no point in reading the decision as it doesn't rely on any actual law or precedent, only the philosophizing of the learned Justices. Now apparently the Fourth Amendment might cover all sorts of personal data held by third parties, even though it was provided voluntarily and with no expectation of privacy. The issue here is not whether such data should be shielded from law enforcement. In other cases, eg medical records, congress enacted specific laws to deal with the issue. Now the Court has arrogated that function to itself. Inevitably, we will have to endure through decades of wasteful lawsuits to define the parameters of this new policy.
That's nice. Do you even understand the argument? See, there is the outcome and then there is the reasoning that supposedly justifies the outcome. The fact that you want your cell phone data kept secret is understandable but it is not a constitutional argument. Why shouldn't a private company be able to cooperate voluntarily with law enforcement ?
SC found it contitutional... why should it? it has some private data, i do not see why it supposed to share it why anyone without the court requirements to do so
To me this case is really a question of agency. Do private companies become agents for the Govt as they track us... or agents for their customers as they do work for us providing communications. I I believe when Americans hire the phone company to provide services for us the phone companies should be seen as our agents...not the govt's agents. I think the 4th amend easily extends to protecting our location data while we are in our own homes and probably other private locations and maybe all locations. "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." So, while I don't like the Court creating new rights either... I think it can be argued this is not a new right.
He is saying that he feeeeels good about the decision. That is the closest you are going to come to a constitutional argument in libdom.
You didn't seem to appreciate that there is a policy question, ie a private company sharing its own data, and a constitutional one, ie does the government have to get a warrant even though the company is prepared to cooperate. I'm saying I understand that people prefer the government has to get a warrant, but I see nothing in the constitution or decades of interpretation by the courts to justify this ruling. Do you think the government also has to get a warrant to ask the water company how much water you are using?
They are providing a service. How does that constitute agency, in a legal sense? The real issue here is people didn't realize this kind of record was being created and stored. Does LE have to get a warrant to look at your internet history, provided the ISP is willing to provide it. Not every company is as traitorous as Apple. Some will cooperate with LE.