SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Supreme Court on Friday put new restraints on law enforcement's access to the ever-increasing amount of private information about Americans available in the digital age.
In the specific case before the court, the justices ruled that authorities generally must obtain a warrant to gain access to cell-tower records that can provide a virtual timeline and map of a person's whereabouts.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote the 5 to 4 decision, in which he was joined by the court's liberal members. Each of the dissenting conservatives wrote separate opinions.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Supreme Court Rules that Warrant is Needed to Access Cell Tower Records
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 41 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 23 2018, @09:28PM (3 children)
Okay, what's the original meaning of "probable cause" and the qualifications for "unreasonable search and seizures"? Please site your references. Or should the judges rule nothing is probable cause and every search is unreasonable and delete those words from the amendment via fiat?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 23 2018, @09:48PM (2 children)
Every search without a warrant is unreasonable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 23 2018, @09:56PM (1 child)
Then why isn't the wording, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against Warrantless searches and seizures..."? I see no way for a strict interpretation can lead to your conclusion.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 24 2018, @09:30AM
Well, I'm not a strict constitutionalist. All I care about is maximizing individual liberties.