Security, Due Process and Convenience

teambpsi writes: "CNN is running an article about ISPs' concern over having law enforcement present during a court-ordered search. Since we are an ISP, I can understand the concern, however, also being a privacy freak, I think it adds a certain weight to the decision of wether to file the search in the first place. It adds a certain levity. I'm not sure what percentage of these search warrants are unnecessary, but I think that having due process in place is important. Opinions?"

Comments

hm

[tps12]

I think it adds a certain weight to the decision of wether to file the search in the first place. It adds a certain levity.

Aren't "weight" and "levity" opposites?

Procedure

[Shalda]

I would expect proper procedure to generally be issuance of a subpoena for records. A search warrant should only be issued when the subpoena is refused, or the ISP is being investigated as an accessory. IANAL, but I do watch a lot of cop shows on TV. Search warrants should always be performed by law enforcement personel. That's probably the biggest difference between what makes it a search warrant and a subpoena.

Re:"unreasonable" burden or not...

[bourne]

Civillians shouldn't be given so much power over the conduct of a search. The police like to give them that power, because they aren't held to the same standards.

Not true - when a civilian is conducting a search in response to a search warrant, they are held to the same standards as law enforcement because they are a law enforcement proxy. An ISP's legal right to monitor traffic is actually reduced when law enforcement presents a formal request, because they have to start monitoring by the (stricter) rules that the government lives under.

IANAL BIPOOS