The U.S. Supreme Court rules cops need warrant for cell phone location data
FILE- This March 5, 2009, file photo shows the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington. The Supreme Court will struggle this week with the validity of an Arizona law that tries to keep illegal immigrants from voting by demanding all state residents show documents proving their U.S. citizenship before registering to vote in national elections. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
Early on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed all cell phone owners a victory. The court had to consider if law enforcement needs a warrant in order to get someone’s cell phone location data when investigating that person for an offense.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The court has rules that law enforcement does need a warrant for such data.
“Given the unique nature of cell phone location records, the fact that the information is held by a third party does not by itself overcome the user’s claim to Fourth Amendment protection,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the court’s 5-4 majority opinion on Carpenter v. United States. Roberts elaborated that obtaining location in data in general should be treated as a search, requiring police to show probable cause.
The court rejected a government claim that the records being held by carriers like Sprint meant there was no reasonable expectation of privacy. “Seismic shifts” have altered our concepts, the court said.
“Sprint Corporation and its competitors are not your typical witnesses,” Roberts wrote. “Unlike the nosy neighbor who keeps an eye on comings and goings, they are ever alert, and their memory is nearly infallible.”
In the case of Timothy Carpenter, the robbery convict at the heart of the case, police are said to have obtained 12,898 location points, tracking him over a course of 127 days. The American Civil Liberties Union came to his defense.
About Post Author
Discover more from CompuScoop.com
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
