I couldn’t agree more with the Supreme Court. And I’m a cop.
From the WashingtonTimes.com:
Major ruling updates privacy laws for 21st century
by Stephen Dinan
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police cannot go snooping through people’s cell phones without a warrant, in a unanimous decision that amounts to a major statement in favor of privacy rights.
Police agencies had argued that searching through the data on cell phones was no different than asking someone to turn out his pockets, but the justices rejected that, saying a cell phone is more fundamental.
Those making the argument on behalf of law enforcement that searching a cell phone is no more intrusive than turning out pockets, are daft and liars and in contravention of the 4th Amendment.
Which I have sworn to uphold and take quite seriously.
In more “layman’s” terms: that argument is bullshit.
Cell phones are no longer just phones. They no longer just take calls. They now can represent an entire person’s life in the digital age. They have contact lists, internet links, calendared events, assignments, lists, apps, e-mails and providers, and just about every footprint imagined in today’s digital world.
They are a far cry from the original brick phones used solely for convenient phone calls from semi-distant locations.
Justice Roberts nails it:
“The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the unanimous court.
“Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple— get a warrant.”
Which is, quite simply, what I’ve had to do for years. If I valued my information, my evidence, my statements, my witnesses, my chronology, my informants, I was forced to acquire a warrant as “your affiant” and submitted to a lawful judge in my jurisdiction.
I should not be able to search your cell phone on a vehicle stop. I should not be able to search your phone on a domestic violence call. I should not be able to search your cell phone on a fight call. I should not be able to search your cell phone on a theft call.
Not unless I can ascribe truly probative and evidentiary value to it, and make a direct linkage between your cell phone and the crime I allege you to have committed.
Down to the heart of the matter:
Justices even said police cannot check a cellphone’s call log, saying even those contain more information that just phone numbers, and so perusing them is a violation of privacy that can only be justified with a warrant.
The chief justice said cellphones are different not only because people can carry around so much more data — the equivalent of millions of pages of documents — that police would have access to, but that the data itself is qualitatively different than what someone might otherwise carry.
He said it could lay bare someone’s entire personal history, from their medical records to their “specific movements down to the minute.”
You want it?
Do what I’ve had to do for years.
Get a warrant.
I can only hope the issue of the NSA is next.
BZ
You are a good man!!!
I believe in the Rule of Law.
And I believe in the oath I swore to uphold.
I believe in our foundational documents, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Apparently, for this, I am labeled a “terrorist.”
BZ
should you be able to seize the phone and hold it-preventing the owner from accessing it-while awaiting said warrant?
if so, doesn’t the warrant become merely an inconvenience to the cop, not a true protection for the individual?
Let’s hope, and thanks for actually obeying the law!
How sad that you would even have to say that.
BZ