Warrantless cellphone location tracking is illegal, US circuit court rules
Source: The Verge
A US Appellate Court has ruled that police must obtain a warrant before collecting cellphone location data, finding that acquiring records of what cell towers a phone connected to and when it was connected to them constitutes a Fourth Amendment search. This ruling, from the Eleventh Circuit, is in opposition to a ruling made nearly a year ago by a separate appellate court. While this ruling won't overturn that one because of their separate jurisdictions, it adds critical precedent to a privacy question that's still far from decided across the country.
In its reasoning, the court notes that while the Fourth Amendment has traditionally been applied to property rights, it's gradually expanded to protect much more, including communications. "In the twentieth century, a second view gradually developed," the court writes, "that is, that the Fourth Amendment guarantee protects the privacy rights of the people without respect to whether the alleged 'search' constituted a trespass against property rights."
In particular, the court cites a Supreme Court ruling that found that tracking a person using a GPS unit installed in their car requires a warrant. Even though the location data of a cell site can only place the person holding the phone within a certain range, the court feels that that range is still quite detailed. In the case at hand, cell site data was used to place the defendant near the location of several robberies.
"While committing a crime is certainly not within a legitimate expectation of privacy, if the cell site location data could place him near those scenes, it could place him near any other scene," the court writes. "There is a reasonable privacy interest in being near the home of a lover, or a dispensary of medication, or a place of worship, or a house of ill repute."
The parallels between this case and the GPS case are not exact, however, and it remains to be seen how most jurisdictions will interpret phone location data. In its ruling last year, the Fifth Circuit said that such data was no more than a business record that belongs to phone carriers and is therefore not protected. It said that people who want to see it protected should lobby Congress to do something about it.
<snip>
Read more: http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/11/5801238/warrantless-cellphone-location-tracking-illegal-us-court-rules
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)What about cops who use a Stingray Device purchased from the Harris Corp? It pretends to be a cell phone tower and intercepts data. Shouldn't that be breaking and entering?
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Of these devices is needed. Peace officers have become nothing more than narcs and snoops.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)the right way in these matters.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)cell phone records.
"A US Appellate Court has ruled that police must obtain a warrant before collecting cellphone location data, finding that acquiring records of what cell towers a phone connected to and when it was connected to them constitutes a Fourth Amendment search. "
When warrants are issued then they are legal, this is normal for police departments to acquire warrants when getting the records.
smallcat88
(426 posts)What would the founding fathers do?
Probably tell the NSA to go fuck itself.
https://www.resetthenet.org/
24601
(3,961 posts)starting with Washington's Spies: The Story of America's First Spy Ring by Alexander Rose.
http://www.amazon.com/Washingtons-Spies-Story-Americas-First/dp/0553383299
Uncle Joe
(58,355 posts)Thanks for the thread, villager.