And suddenly, cops and feds don't need warrants to put a GPS tracking unit on your car
posted by gene
on Tue, 2010-08-31 03:38
Don't worry. Well, you should worry, you just don't have to worry about an immediate threat of law enforcement agents secretly slapping GPS tracking units onto whichever vehicles they want to. Unless you live in one of these states, then you're kind of screwed.
a map of the us court of appeals 9th circuit
Right, if you live in one of these states, at least for the time being, cops and feds can stick a GPS tracking device on your car, without a warrant, completely secretly. And any evidence derived from such a measure will be admissible in a court of law. The only way to make such provocative behavior on law enforcement's part right now is to keep your vehicle in a garage. Even your driveway is fair game.
If you are a paranoid person, it might be time to crack open your piggy bank and buy yourself a GPS signal detector.
Here's what happened. A man named Juan, suspected of being part of a marijuana growing ring, had cops put a GPS tracking device on his car while it was sitting in his driveway. Of course, during his trial this evidence came to light. So he of course appealed, since his 4th amendment rights had clearly been violated, and wanted all evidence which was obtained as a results of the illegal tracking device be suppressed.
The US Court of Appeals disagreed with this plan. The Appeal rejected, and warrantless GPS tracking of any vehicle in the whole of the 9th district is effectively legal.
The dissenting judges were clear about why they were dissenting. Judge Kozinki in his dissenting comments states:
"The needs of law enforcement, to which my colleagues seem inclined to refuse nothing, are quickly making personal privacy a distant memory. 1984 may have come a bit later than predicted, but it’s here at last."
...
I don’t think that most people in the United States would agree with the panel that someone who leaves his car parked in his driveway outside the door of his home invites people to crawl under it and attach a device that will track the vehicle’s every movement and transmit that information to total strangers. There is something creepy and un-American about such clandestine and underhanded behavior. To those of us who have lived under a totalitarian regime, there is an eerie feeling of déjà vu. This case, if any, deserves the comprehensive, mature and diverse consideration that an en banc panel can provide. We are taking a giant leap into the unknown, and the consequences for ourselves and our children may be dire and irreversible. Some day, soon, we may wake up and find we’re living in Oceania."
Well. At first it pleases me to read something clearheaded about this from one of the Judges. However, he was in the minority, apparently. And also, I would have assumed that putting a tracking device on a car ANYWHERE without a warrant would violate my 4th amendment rights, not just if it were on my own property.
Oh well. This is likely to go to the supreme court. Before then though, it is entirely possible that law enforcement agencies in other circuits may attempt doing this. They got away with it in the 9th circuit, after all, why not give it a shot?
What do you think?
Tags:
Comments
Re: And suddenly, cops and feds don't need warrants to put a ...
This is obviously an absurd ruling. Oh, fuck, I can't really say that without reading the ruling. BRB. OK I have read their damned ruling and I will say it with conviction: It is utterly absurd. It makes a mockery of the 4th Amendment. If the 4th Amendment does not protect us from the police sneaking onto our property warantlessly to place devices to track all of our movements then it is hard to imagine what meaningful protection it does afford us. Well, I guess it's like Kozinki says: It does continue to provide substantial protection to the rich. Alas I am not personally rich enough to avoid surveillance under the terms of this ruling and even if I were I doubt I would find that much consolation.
This behavior would be unacceptable even if the police were investigating a real crime. (In that case, they should still get a damn warrant.) In actual fact their reason for feeling compelled to this dark path was that they had observed someone buying fertilizer, irrigation equipment, "large quantities" of groceries, and deer repellent. Based on that evidence they suspected them of growing plants. And in fact all that had happened was that someone grew plants. No crimes were committed. I refuse to concede that a crime was committed simply because they declared something ordinary a crime. They might as well declare breathing air illegal, and then undo all the protections of civilization whenever they detect carbon dioxide.
I'm also deeply offended by this entirely absurd assertion: "Pineda-Moreno subsequently consented to a search of his vehicle and home." No, he did not. They are constantly asserting that drug dealers "consent" to police searches of places where their drugs are hidden. This is so absurd that I deeply doubt the sincerity of everyone involved. It seems to me that they are simply playing the Constitution as if it were a game, and any Liberty accidentally provided to the people lost points. Fuck them.
Re: And suddenly, cops and feds don't need warrants to put a ...
I guess I am not as smart as a judge who deems the car that I bought and paid for is not PRIVATE Property.
Certainly I would not want Juan to get away with anything but that would be the police's fault for not obtaining a warrant first. Am I wrong about that?
Because like any law it must be made for ALL and not exclusive to any individual.
Meaning that we can't just protect everyone else's rights and just convict Juan.
Nope, get a warrant to trespass onto my personal property I.E. MY CAR, and then you do what you have to.
Remember the article a few years back when this guy lost his business when he was raided by "Tax Agents" because some drug user copped a deal with them and ratted him out? Found out it was completely false but his business and name were gone.
Same example, by some confusion you get targeted in their sites and proceed without a warrant obtained by giving PROOF to a JUDGE that your rights can be violated.
Not only can it screw your life up but think of the wasted man power and money if and when it leads to a dead end. Don't ever think by any means that if you’re a certain low life or minority that they wouldn't care by creating some charges to justify their investigation.
Just like the police officer sleeping during his shift has to hand out speeding tickets in order to say he was working unsupervised.
I am not saying by any means law enforcement is bad but there has to be a balance because those with the badge and gun can take their limited power and dance with it.
The reason we have the 4th amendment in the first place is to keep those with power in check for ALL Americans but they like to dance around our rights to justify what they do.
We do this because we love and want to protect you. Of course if we let you be free and run your own life then you would know how much little freedom you actually have.
KP
Re: And suddenly, cops and feds don't need warrants to put a ...
Nevada was the first state to allow warrantles GPS tracking devices hiddent ona vehicle: a Nevadan was sentence to prison not base on any recorded conversations or witness testimony, but base on where the defend's car was tracked going; there was no evidence the defendant did anything illegal.