Posted on 06/27/2014 11:31:15 AM PDT by Hugin
Can cops simply take your cell phone and browse through it to their hearts’ content after they arrest you? Today, in Riley v. California, a unanimous Supreme Court answered that question with a resounding “no.” It’s not only a victory for digital privacy, but an example of the kind of judicial engagement that we desperately need to protect our liberties from unreasonable government interference.
In Riley, the Court addressed the question of whether the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement applies to cell phone searches. In two separate cases, individuals were arrested and searched by police. The police took their cell phones and searched their phones for incriminating information. In both cases, the government used evidence taken from their phones at trial. In neither case did the police secure a warrant for the search of the cell phones.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
I was shocked to see the decision was unanimous, happy, but shocked.
"Riley offers a case study in judicial engagement. Judicial engagement isn’t a new theory of judging, and it isn’t a complicated one. It holds that, in every constitutional case, judges should honestly seek to determine whether the government is pursuing constitutionally permissible ends through constitutionally permissible means, basing their decision on real facts and real evidence. Judges shouldn’t presume that the government is acting constitutionally and they should be vigilant in ensuring that the government doesn’t pursue even legitimate ends through means that aren’t reasonably related to those ends or that violate individual rights."
Folks, that is the essence of the Framers' "necessary and proper" clause.
IOW, real judges would assume laws to be unconstitutional and demand the government prove otherwise.
It is the only acceptable approach in a free government.
Yep, and followed by another unanimous decision against Obama’s illegal non-recess recess appointments...
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/26/justice/supreme-court-recess-appointments/index.html
“The justices’ unanimous ruling on the narrowest of grounds against the Obama administration could invalidate hundreds of decisions by the National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency at the center of this legal fight.”
For some reason, “Get a Warrant!” has the same impact as “Get a Room!”.
It’s all the more remarkable since SCOTUS had previously ruled exactly the opposite. I’m giving some credit to Edward Snowden for changing public opinion on government and electronic privacy in general.
Yes, that would be GREAT if Obama gave a damn about the Constitution and obeying the law.
He doesn’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.