Own a cellphone? You might want to watch this case

Wednesday, November 29, 2017
 | 
Chris Woodward (OneNewsNow.com)

using a smartphoneA case before the Supreme Court today could have big implications for law enforcement – and for anyone who owns a cellphone.

At issue in Carpenter v. United States is whether police can go directly to cellular service providers and request the historical phone records of individuals without obtaining a warrant, as required by the Fourth Amendment.

UPDATE: The Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it could impose limits on the government's ability to track Americans' movements through collection of their cellphone information. Read more...

"I think this is going to be a big one to watch, because in recent years the Court has been grappling with the scope of Fourth Amendment protections when it comes to emerging technology," says Elizabeth Slattery, legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation. "A few terms ago, [the Supreme Court] ruled on a case dealing with whether police could attach a GPS tracking device to a criminal suspect's car – and they ended up ruling against the police in that case."

Slattery

A few terms later, she continues, the high court heard a case dealing with whether police could then go into an arrested suspect's cellphone and look at his phone records.

"Again, the Supreme Court ruled against the police in that case," notes Slattery.

In the Carpenter case, a criminal defendant is challenging his conviction for six robberies – crimes that were proven in part by the government and police using his cellphone location records.

"They used these to prove where he was and that he was at the scene of the crime at the time that it occurred," explains Slattery. "I think it could have big implications for how law enforcement operates ... and I think anyone who owns a cellphone should care about the outcome of this case."

In an article addressing Carpenter, Slattery notes that some courts have applied the so-called "third-party doctrine" in similar cases – but that some have not. That principle holds that information voluntarily shared with someone else – a person's bank or phone service provider, for example – isn't protected by the Fourth Amendment; that in sharing such information, an individual assumes the risk that it will be shared with others.

Jennifer Lynch, a senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says the main challenge for the Supreme Court in Carpenter will be to figure out how to reset the parameters of the third-party doctrine for the digital age – or do away with it altogether.

Consider Supporting Us?

The staff at Onenewsnow.com strives daily to bring you news from a biblical perspective. If you benefit from this platform and want others to know about it please consider a generous gift today.

MAKE A DONATION

Comments

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWSBRIEF

SUBSCRIBE

VOTE IN OUR POLL

What pro-abortion argument angers you the most?

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

Tornadoes flip campers, damage homes in Southern Plains
In Pennsylvania, Trump touts 2020 chances, swipes at Biden
'Medicare for All's' rich benefits 'leapfrog' other nations
Obama judge approves challenge to Georgia voting machines
Mississippi spent $1.5M on Weight Watchers for teachers
Dutch minister quits over under-reporting asylum seeker crimes

LATEST FROM THE WEB

NYC schools chief 'demoting white officials': 'There's a toxic whiteness concept going on'
Four in 10 Americans embrace some form of socialism
New SAT ‘adversity score’ just another invitation for fraud
Abortion: The black community’s holocaust
Bernie Sanders’s backward charter-school proposal

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day
NEXT STORY
Any bets on how SCOTUS will rule in NCAA case?

sports betting gamblingThe future of sports betting may be determined by an upcoming Supreme Court case, but there are many implications for states depending on how the high court rules.