Constitutional Rights Group Challenges Warrantless GPS Tracking

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper

A powerful group of political figures issued a report last week condemning law enforcement’s unchecked use of high-tech surveillance system. The Constitution Project is troubled in particular by the ease with which a person’s movements can be tracked 24 hours a day. The conservative-leaning group insisted on the need to bring the law back in line with fundamental constitutional principles.

“Private sector technologies that enable constant monitoring of individuals are moving inexorably forward, and as they are developed, law enforcement agencies inevitably seek to use these new surveillance tools,” the report stated. “These include not only GPS devices and cell phones, but also laptop and notebook computers, location based services like OnStar, and technologies yet to be developed. Use of these surveillance devices presents serious challenges in terms of compliance with Fourth Amendment protections. While these technologies enhance the ability of law enforcement agents to accomplish their important work, it is also critical that we carry forward Fourth Amendment safeguards into the Digital Age.”


The statement was put together by a committee that included David Keene, current president of the National Rifle Association; former FBI Director William S. Sessions; Asa Hutchinson, former Republican congressman from Arkansas and former undersecretary of the Department of Homeland Security; Mickey Edwards, former Republican congressman from Oklahoma; and former US Court of Appeals Judge Patricia Wald.

The issue of vehicle tracking will heat up in November as the US Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the case US v. Jones, which will likely settle the existing disagreement among appellate courts over the legality of secretly attaching GPS devices to automobiles without a warrant. The Constitution Project is urging Congress to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act to ban the use of such tracking without judicial oversight, regardless of how the high court rules.

“GPS technology has made pervasive and continuous location tracking possible in a way that was never before feasible relying solely on human law enforcement officers,” the report argued. “When such tracking is conducted, vast quantities of data are collected, automatically stored in a searchable digital database, and analyzed for patterns of behavior that can reveal a great amount of very personal and private information. These technologies convert traditional ‘tailing’ of a suspect into a new and different type of surveillance, paired with new and powerful digital analytic tools, that alters our analysis of expectations of privacy in a public place. Such tools may be a valuable aid to law enforcement when following a particular suspect. But their use is also a search that should require a warrant based upon a showing of probable cause.”

A copy of the report is available in a 120k PDF file at the source link below.

Source:

Statement on Location Tracking (The Constitution Project, 9/21/2011)

[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]

The Newspaper
The Newspaper

More by The Newspaper

Comments
Join the conversation
 1 comment
  • Mikedt Mikedt on Sep 29, 2011

    Glad to see at least one conservative group doesn't fall into the "if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear" camp. Up till now I've been amazed that the party that thinks government is good for nothing is the one most willing to hand over everything except their guns to the government in the name of security.

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next