Supreme Court rules 9-0 that warrant absolutely needed for police GPS tracking

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 23, 2012 7:03 PM GMT
    Good news. Illustrating not only the importance of an independent judiciary, but in fact that the Supreme Court is independent.

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/01/scotus-gps-ruling/

    The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that law enforcement authorities need a probable-cause warrant from a judge to affix a GPS device to a vehicle and monitor its every move.

    The decision (.pdf) in what is arguably the biggest Fourth Amendment case in the computer age, rejected the Obama administration’s position. The government had told the high court that it could even affix GPS devices on the vehicles of all members of the Supreme Court, without a warrant.

    “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,’” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote.

    In a footnote, Scalia added that, “Whatever new methods of investigation may be devised, our task, at a minimum, is to decide whether the action in question would have constituted a ‘search’ within the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Where, as here, the government obtains information by physically intruding on a constitutionally protected area, such a search has undoubtedly occurred.” [...]

    The Obama administration urged the court to reinstate the conviction and life sentence of Jones, a suspected cocaine dealer whose vehicle was tracked via GPS for a month without a court warrant.

    The government told the justices during oral arguments that that GPS devices have become a common tool in crime fighting, saying it is employed “thousands” of times annually.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 23, 2012 7:06 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidGood news.

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/01/scotus-gps-ruling/

    The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that law enforcement authorities need a probable-cause warrant from a judge to affix a GPS device to a vehicle and monitor its every move.

    The decision (.pdf) in what is arguably the biggest Fourth Amendment case in the computer age, rejected the Obama administration’s position. The government had told the high court that it could even affix GPS devices on the vehicles of all members of the Supreme Court, without a warrant.

    “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,’” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote.

    In a footnote, Scalia added that, “Whatever new methods of investigation may be devised, our task, at a minimum, is to decide whether the action in question would have constituted a ‘search’ within the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Where, as here, the government obtains information by physically intruding on a constitutionally protected area, such a search has undoubtedly occurred.” [...]

    The Obama administration urged the court to reinstate the conviction and life sentence of Jones, a suspected cocaine dealer whose vehicle was tracked via GPS for a month without a court warrant.

    The government told the justices during oral arguments that that GPS devices have become a common tool in crime fighting, saying it is employed “thousands” of times annually.


    I agree 9-0 !

    Although practically speaking there's a much easier way .... my OnStar, Droid x, Droid Razr and my 9500ix and probably my Lidar jammer when I'm using it.