Supreme Court Cel phone privacy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ResinRubber, Jun 27, 2014.

  1. ResinRubber

    ResinRubber Civilly disobedient/Mod

    Sometimes, we (the collective we) win one. On Wednesday June 25, 2014 the United States Supreme Court ruled UNANIMOUSLY against the LEO being able to search private cel phones without an explicit warrant stating such or exigent (read emergency) circumstances. Law enforcement is pissed and THAT, in itself, makes this grower a very happy boy.


    No longer will being pulled over for an unpaid speeding ticket or suspended drivers license open up the most intimate details of your life to a nosy self important thug in blue.


    The Court ruled that Law Enforcement probing cel phones is akin to reading a personal diary or examining a rolodex. That it is contained on our person is not relevant to the privacy that is given to such items. Now, if we could just get the numb nut Law and Order politicians bought and sold by the NSA and Homeland Security to understand how tapping the very cel phones that they can't legally examine physically is unConstitutional as well there might be a chance....no matter how slim....to regain some semblance of a free unfettered society.


    More stories on this topic here..... http://online.wsj.com/articles/high-court-police-usually-need-warrants-for-cell-phone-data-1403706571
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2014
  2. nippie

    nippie preachin' and pimpin'

    I seen that ruling.


    I would still highly!!!! encourage people to password protect if not fully encrypt their phones.


    They still have the right to preserve your files on your phone if they fear destruction of the files.....if your phone is already encrypted they can't copy the files.


    And we all know how honest cops are, they put you in the back of their cruiser, you really don't think they are going to have a peak through your shit?


    But I agree the court finally do something right, I just find it hard to believe that California and Obama both said officer safety trumped privacy (basically falling on the previous arguments that officers can check pockets for safety reasons)
     
  3. CCrete

    CCrete Mr. Poopyfacepeepeehead

    ya but what is stopping each state from overruling this bullshit, just like the weed laws are, the phone thing might just not hold up in a federal case is all...local is another thing


    Just sounds like the government printing more crap as they let each state do their own thing as the feds turn a blind eye...
     
  4. nippie

    nippie preachin' and pimpin'

    fuck CC in your state that can search car without a warrant!!!!!!


    Prob cause only...scaring shit


    Encrypt!!!!!
     
  5. LionLoves420

    LionLoves420 Lazy Days In The Sun

    I don't think yall understand how the Supreme Court and court cases work.
     
  6. nippie

    nippie preachin' and pimpin'

    How so??


    The ruling is clear, they cannot search your phone unless you are under arrest, once under arrest they have that right....they just can't search on a random stop.....kind of like asking for ID, but they do that all the time also
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2014
  7. ResinRubber

    ResinRubber Civilly disobedient/Mod

    Nope nip. They need an actual warrant in every state to search your cel or examine its contents. Simple arrest or detention is no longer adequate cause. The only exception is exigent circumstances, which can then be challenged in court. If a judge decides there was no emergency then any contents of your cel (and derivation thereof) becomes inadmissible.


    The court case came out of a cel search due to arrest for a traffic warrant. So it does indeed cover privacy violation while under arrest.


    So that cop nosing through your cel in violation of your Right to Privacy will very quickly lose any case they can construct because of it. It is hard and fast law in every US state after the ruling. It's the very same as entering private property now. If you say no...they can't do it unless a judge decides they can in your specific circumstance.


    CC..it's law in every state now. The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled and it's law. Period, end of story and no cop or judge anywhere can change that
     
  8. nippie

    nippie preachin' and pimpin'

    Ahhh....but you are forgetting the destruction of evidence clause written into the ruling.


    If they stop you with weight or anything, they can claim and WILL get a warrant.....thus always encrypt


    They are just relying more on local judges than cops to sign off, nothing is really changing


    They are more concerned with cops seeing naked pix of the wifey than someone who's pulling weight or another 'criminal' act


    And depending on your jurisdiction depends if you are safe.....theres literally a saying around my county for YEARS...you can get an indictment against a ham sandwich because the judges rubber stamp everything. Literally is a joke, but we do have decent prosecutors and police....but not every county


    This case is more of a local/states rights issue than anything in my eyes.....the feds are kicking it back to the locals.


    Be safe and Encrypt!!!! and watch the apps!!!!!
     
  9. ResinRubber

    ResinRubber Civilly disobedient/Mod

    Oh yeah, absolutely Nip. Still encrypt. Just nice knowing that Mr Blue shirt can't take my phone and hand it to some department tech because "he's got a hunch" after a minor run in.


    You get caught with weight in your current posession or in the middle of committing a felony and all bets are off. But....did you check the basis of the original case Riley vs California? The ruling got a possible gang banger off on a murder conspiracy rap so the message is clear that even in extreme cases personal privacy trumps nosy cops.
     

Share This Page