backtop


Print 88 comment(s) - last by eskimospy.. on Aug 29 at 6:26 PM

Administration is upset about Circuit Court ruling that prohibits warrantless smartphone searches

President Barack Obama's (D) Assistant Attorney General (AG), Mythili Raman, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) have filed a petition to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to consider overriding a July decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit which ruled that warrantless cell phone searches were a violation of the Fourth Amendment.  The 1st Circuit Court sets precedent for Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, and Rhode Island.

The Obama administration has oft made the argument that the Fourth Amendment -- which protects a citizen's "houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" -- is "inconvenient" for law enforcement and should be pruned back to a much more limited form.  In its argument in favor of warrantless smartphone searches, the President's staff argues that notebooks, calendars, and pagers have all been found in past SCOTUS or Circuit Court rulings to be searchable without warrant (not eligible for Fourth Amendment protections).

In a post on academic law blog "The Volokh Conspiracy", George Washington University law school professor Orin Kerr, a prominent social libertarian points out a major flaw in the Obama administration's argument.
 
Smartphone search
The Obama administration is pushing for warrantless smartphone searches.
[Image Source: Cole Hayes]

He points out that the administration appears to have cherry-picked a case involving an older device (the case in question involved an classic "dumb" cell phone seized in a 2007 crack cocaine bust of a Mass. man).  He says that asking the court to consider a case with outdated information may be an attempt to lead them to an inaccurate conclusion.  He writes:

Given that the argument for treating cell phones differently from physical items hinges on the storage capacity and services available through smartphones, I think it would be very helpful for the Court to take a case involving a smartphone instead of a more primitive model. In recent years, smartphones quickly have become ubiquitous: About 35% of Americans owned one by May 2011, 46% owned one by February 2012, and 56% owned one by May 2013. (In case you’re wondering, 91% of Americans have cellphones, so about 61% of cell phones owned as of May 2013 are smart phones.) Reviewing a case with an earlier model phone would lead to a decision with facts that are atypical now and are getting more outdated every passing month.

He argues that it would be better for the SCOTUS to examine a separate case that law professor Stanford Univ. Jeff Fisher has asked the SCOTUS to consider -- Riley v. California.  That case involved a 2009 search of a customer's Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd (KSC:005930Instinct M800, an early smartphone.  The case involved officers searching through a suspected gang member's smartphone for videos, pictures, and address book -- all without getting a warrant for the search, a key step of Fourth Amendment due process that prevents abuse.

The California Court of Appeal, Fourth District declined to hear the Riley case, leaving SCOTUS as a potential route for a further appeal.

Sources: DOJ via The Washington Post [PDF], The Volokh Conspiracy



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Right Wing Nut Job
By BSMonitor on 8/23/2013 10:04:02 AM , Rating: 0
I like how this is all Obama administration when most of the articles he sites point to programs started long before 2009....

J Mick has zero credibility. Mad much bro?




RE: Right Wing Nut Job
By Monkey's Uncle on 8/23/2013 2:29:45 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Mad much bro? ...


Are you? Sounds like it.


RE: Right Wing Nut Job
By FaaR on 8/23/2013 7:02:36 PM , Rating: 3
If Obama did not like those programs or -gosh! - thought they were unconstitutional (he is a constitutional lawyer after all), he could always abolish them if he wanted to. Since he does not one can only conclude he endorses them.


RE: Right Wing Nut Job
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/2013 8:11:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If Obama did not like those programs or -gosh! - thought they were unconstitutional (he is a constitutional lawyer after all), he could always abolish them if he wanted to.


He got into the White House on a campaign platform of doing just that. Suddenly he gets into office, and EVERYTHING is Bush's fault or the Republicans or Rush Limbaugh's or Fox News or Wall Street or "Corporate greed" or anyone, ANYONE but him. The goddamn President!

Lies, just more lies.


RE: Right Wing Nut Job
By FaaR on 8/23/2013 10:15:58 PM , Rating: 2
You're not going to get a republican prez to abolish wireless wiretapping or the patriot act, or close down the dept. of homeland defence or rein in the NSA spying on americans either. I don't know why you keep deluding yourself. All of that crud was invented by "small government" republicans, you think they'd instituted it if they really were against it? Please. Grow a brain. But yeah, just keep railing against Obama and scream about what a huge crook he is (he is, btw), that's constructive. Especially as he's already in his second term and can't run for re-election again. lol...


RE: Right Wing Nut Job
By Piiman on 8/24/2013 9:36:29 AM , Rating: 3
"You're not going to get a republican prez to abolish wireless wiretapping or the patriot act, or close down the dept. of homeland defence or rein in the NSA spying on americans either."

BINGO

But you can bet your lat dollar they will run on that in the next election.


"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki