Justice Scalia strikes blow for individual freedom

[AngryAmish]

[link:http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=145639480|

"The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that police must get a search warrant before using GPS technology to track criminal suspects.

The ruling represents a serious complication for law enforcement nationwide, which increasingly relies on high tech surveillance of suspects, including the use of various types of GPS technology.

A GPS device installed by police on Washington, D.C., nightclub owner Antoine Jones' Jeep helped them link him to a suburban house used to stash money and drugs. He was sentenced to life in prison before the appeals court overturned the conviction.

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia said that the government's installation of a GPS device, and its use to monitor the vehicle's movements, constitutes a search, meaning that a warrant is required."

Whodo thunk?

[MotherPetrie]

1. There go those activist judges again... Oops.

[Angry Dragon]

2. get a search warrant ------- problem solved

[AndyTiedye]

3. in other news…

[rustydog]

7. In other news...Antonin Scalia found a GPS device planted under his vehicle last year

He was advised by local law enforcement that if he had nothing to hide, he had nothing to worry about the pollice finding.


I am glad and surprised they actually followed the Constitution on this.

[gratuitous]

4. Surprising

But I'm sure there will be a carve out if everyone agrees that the person tailed was really, really, bad. After all, we've arrogated to ourselves the right to summarily execute people because of our exceptional exceptionalness. What's so intrusive about sticking a bug on a very, very bad person's car?

[usregimechange]

5. Is GPS in the text of the 4th amendment? No.

So what was Scalia thinking? Either way glad the court did it's job.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

6. "that police must get a search warrant..." I wonder if the DEA or the FBI

have to get a warrant?

[treestar]

8. Interesting for Scalia not to find a way

to twist it into legality. Good news.

[louis-t]

9. Even a blind squirrel....

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

10. That's gonna make it tough to write NCIS episodes.

They do that all the time without a warrant on that show.

They'll actually have to...I dunno...follow procedure now?

*I do enjoy watching the show, and I love watching Mark Harmon

[morningfog]

11. Scalia is concerned with, and based his rationale on, the physical intrusion.

He is consistent in the "sacred place" approach to 4th Amendment cases. He sees it more as a trespass than anything else. If the gps had been installed on the vehicle before someone bought, for example, he would probably not have a problem with police tacking it then.

He is abhorrent on most every issue, and on this one even though he gets some of these cases right, it is arguably for the wrong reasons.

[hootinholler]

12. Meanwhile over on FR

They are approving this decision.

Go Figure.

I have brains to be replaced.

[jsmirman]

13. When the Justices found out at Oral that such a device could end up under their cars

that case was over.

We were in stitches over that, and would have bet you all the money in the world on this outcome.

They were like - wait - you mean that this device could also be used against older rich white men?!

The question was asked and the attorney couldn't answer no. It was open and shut at that point.

[Uncle Joe]

14. It must have been a accident, Scalia meant to dissent and got confused.

He probably won't let that happen again.

Thanks for the thread, AngryAmish.