Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches, updates privacy laws (for 21st century)

www.washingtontimes.com ^ | Updated: 10:37 a.m. on Wednesday, June 25, 2014 | By Stephen Dinan

[OneWingedShark]

I have no faith law enforcement agencies in any capacity will act in accordance with the laws. NONE.

You have captured the essential thought of mine WRT authorities here.

[Glennb51]

Generally those types of forensic recovering situations are sent to an outside lab because most agencies do not have the resources to extract the information.

The labs are under contract and usually do that type of work for more than one agency and numerous companies.

Some Honeywell engineers were always good for deleting files they needed. The hard drives would be removed from the machine and sent to Florida for recovery.

[Lurking Libertarian]

I have a hard time understanding legal jargon. Does anyone know if this means that they can’t confiscate your cell phone during a traffic stop or other stop? Just wondering if it doesn’t mean much if they can take it anyway and then wait to search until they have a warrant.

The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that if you are arrested (not just a traffic stop, but an actual arrest), the police can search you without a warrant and use as evidence anything they find on you. Today's ruling says that that rule no longer applies to cell phones; the police can seize them if you're arrested, but can't search them until they get a warrant.

[OneWingedShark]

he police can seize them if you're arrested, but can't search them until they get a warrant.

Kinda a funny distinction given the actual wording of the 4th:

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[Sacajaweau]

IIRC, they couldn’t use any of Trayvon Martin’s postings OR anything on either the girl’s cell phone or Tray’s cell phone.

[Ken H]

As far as confiscating the device, the courts have held that law enforcement has a duty to gather evidence. If someone is recording an incident, the recording could hold information relating to that person’s guilt or innocence.

So you think it's OK to grab bystanders' cell phones?

[Lurking Libertarian]

It’s a distinction based on pragmatism more than anything else. If you’re arresting someone and taking him to jail, you’re going to make him empty his pockets and turn over the contents regardless.

[Glennb51]

so you think it is ok not to gather evidence that can prove someone’s guilt or innocence?

[Ken H]

Is that a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ to my question?

[Glennb51]

I do not answer leading questions that demand an explanation with a yes or no.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

I use an ellipsis often. Don’t forget this part:

“....In news reporting,........ it is used to indicate that a quotation has been condensed for space, brevity or relevance....”

:)

[TurboZamboni]

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/62/cv9t.jpg/

Comrades, do not naysay the critical work of the State Security Services! NSA is vital cog in IRS-NSA-ACA data hubs. The SSS must be able to track down reactionary running dog capitalists who oppose our Dear Leader Comrade Obama, as he struggles day and night to deliver first-quality National Socialist heath rationing system to all good comrades, (like in glorious worker’s paradise Cuba), while smashing right-wing extremists who hold to outdated notions of so-called “freedom” and “privacy” and “Bill of Rights” under former capitalist “Constitution.” Onward to victory, comrades! Do not deny SSS needed tools to deliver glorious new dawn of socialist equality to all good comrades!