Authorities must get a warrant to track a person’s cell phone location

June 12, 2014
45 181 3

original Gawker

Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled that¬†a warrant is required for cell phone location tracking since¬†someone’s cell phone location data is¬†included as part of a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment.

The decision can be found here.

In the case, the police used data from cellular providers to catch armed robbers. The police did not get a warrant and instead obtained a court order which instead of requiring ‘probable cause‘ is obtained if there is ‘reasonable grounds to believe” that the information is relevant to such investigation.

The final verdict, while good for privacy advocates, did not reverse the final verdict, warrantless mining of location data is unconstitutional. Unfortunately for the defendant, even though his constitutional rights were violated, the judges did not believe that this was a “reversible error”¬†and therefore kept the verdict from the previous court.

o-JOHN-OLIVER-GOP-NSA-facebook Huff Post

The ACLU has responded with the following statement:

‚ÄúThe court‚Äôs opinion is a resounding defense of the Fourth Amendment‚Äôs continuing vitality in the digital age. The court soundly repudiates the government‚Äôs argument that by merely using a cell phone, people somehow surrender their privacy rights.‚ÄĚ

Comments

  • Xavier_NYC

    WHY WONT CARRIER IQ DIE!!!!!!! AT&T YOU’RE PISSING ME OFF

  • AngelaRGonzales

    The police did not get a warrant and instead obtained a court order which instead of requiring ‚Äėprobable cause‚Äė is obtained if there is ‚Äėreasonable grounds to believe‚ÄĚ that the information is relevant to such investigation. http://0rz.tw/9BIIY

  • Android Developer

    This reminds me of something. Does anybody know which movie had a scene where 2 guys called the police and had an anti-tracking device, and the police had an anti-anti-tracker device, and so on… ?