Slashdot Mirror


Warrantless GPS Tracking Is Legal, Says WI Court

PL/SQL Guy writes "A Wisconsin appeals court ruled Thursday that police can attach GPS trackers to cars to secretly track anybody's movements without obtaining search warrants. As the law currently stands, the court said police can mount GPS on cars to track people without violating their constitutional rights — even if the drivers aren't suspects. Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, wrote Madison Judge Paul Lundsten."

6 of 594 comments (clear)

  1. True, but ... by PPH · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... it was dark, this guy was attaching a device to the underside of my truck that looked like a bomb. So I shot him.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  2. New law? by DownWithMedia1.0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This sounds like a crazy decision, but the WI judge isnt making any new law here (not that the law is correct.) In fact, police have always been able to do this, because citizens have "no reasonable expectation of privacy" when they are in public. 4th amendment law rarely protects anyone when they are outside in public, with the rare exceptions of when their bags or persons are protected from search and/or seizure (that is, if a search or seizure has occurred.) If you are interested more in this crackpot area of the law, see US v. Katz and its wide ranging progeny, especially US v. Knotts (electronic tracking devices, no reasonable expectation of privacy in your location).

  3. Not a meaningfull decision by alljake · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a lawyer in Wisconsin, I can tell you that this decision is pretty meaningless. I have had several cases go to the court of appeals (this court) and you almost always lose there on novel issues like this one. Til the WI supreme court rules takes this and rules or denies further appeal, this is not news. For some reason our CoA's don't like making big splashes, they will almost always just side with the state.

  4. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When over time GPS tracking becomes "normal observational techniques", would the police not then be able to ticket the driver for speeding? Right now a police cruiser that is tailing someone can give them a ticket for speeding. If GPS tracking is thought of as the same as tailing, why would it be different. Right now people may see a difference, how about in 10 years? how about 25 years?

    Right now there is a limit on how many people can be trailed by a cruiser based on actual numbers of the police force. How does this translate to GPS tracking? Seems like some over zealous politician could get thru funding to have one tracker per citizen.

  5. Re:But... by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Police have always been able to 'tail' suspects. I feel this is no different.

    Except that tailing you does not need them to "secretly attach a GPS device" on your property. Yep. Not different at all.

    How about skipping the car and implanting the tracker on, say, your shoulder? Or if that's too invasive, require you to carry the device at all times?

    --
    Send your spendthrift head of state this
  6. Re:But... by oneirophrenos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Or better yet, putting GPS on police cars.

    This is actually a very good idea. With all these invasions of privacy imposed on citizens, the police should be subjected to such surveillance as well. How about civilian squads monitoring the movements and actions of police units? Think of it as a kind of inverted neighbourhood watch. Whenever a cop roughs someone up, a police-watcher would be there with a camera to put it all on tape. Try to negate that in court!