cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
r3020
Senior Advisor

Supreme court gets one right.

Victory for the peasants.

 

snip-

The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police cannot go snooping through people’s cell phones without a warrant, in a unanimous decision that amounts to a major statement in favor of privacy rights.

Police agencies had argued that searching through the data on cell phones was no different than asking someone to turn out his pockets, but the justices rejected that, saying a cell phone is more fundamental.

 

The ruling amounts to a 21st century update to legal understanding of privacy rights.

“The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the unanimous court.

“Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple— get a warrant.”

Justices even said police cannot check a cellphone’s call log, saying even those contain more information that just phone numbers, and so perusing them is a violation of privacy that can only be justified with a warrant.

The chief justice said cellphones are different not only because people can carry around so much more data — the equivalent of millions of pages of documents — that police would have access to, but that the data itself is qualitatively different than what someone might otherwise carry.

He said it could lay bare someone’s entire personal history, from their medical records to their “specific movements down to the minute.”



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/25/supreme-court-bans-warrantless-cell-phone-searches/#...

5 Replies
Canuck_2
Senior Contributor

Re: Supreme court gets one right.

I thought you meant this one.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/25/us-usa-gaymarriage-idUSKBN0F027520140625

 

A U.S. appeals court ruled on Wednesday that conservative Utah may not ban gay couples from marrying, a decision that capped a day of victories for same-sex nuptials and nudges the issue closer to the U.S. Supreme Court.

r3020
Senior Advisor

Re: Supreme court gets one right.


@Canuck_2 wrote:

I thought you meant this one.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/25/us-usa-gaymarriage-idUSKBN0F027520140625

 

A U.S. appeals court ruled on Wednesday that conservative Utah may not ban gay couples from marrying, a decision that capped a day of victories for same-sex nuptials and nudges the issue closer to the U.S. Supreme Court.


No. And it was a unanimous decision. The court hit a home run.

bruce MN
Advisor

Re: Supreme court gets one right.

Missing in your obvious delight in this (which I and I'm certain many others here share also) are the props that are due to the ACLU, which carried a goodly share of the water on it.
bruce MN
Advisor

Re: Supreme court gets one right.

Oh yeah the Latina gal was the lead Justice on the case. Been telling you that the progressives and libertarians have much to share
r3020
Senior Advisor

Re: Supreme court gets one right.


@bruce MN wrote:
Missing in your obvious delight in this (which I and I'm certain many others here share also) are the props that are due to the ACLU, which carried a goodly share of the water on it.

When they're right they're right, and on this they're right.