GPS Tracking Without a Warrant Declared Legal

jnaujok writes "The Ninth Circuit court has declared that attaching a GPS tracker to your car, as it sits in your driveway, or by extension on a public street, and then using it to monitor every one of your movements, is totally legal, and can be performed by the police without needing a warrant. So, if you live in the Western United States, big brother has arrived."

Comments

Sauce for the goose

[Locke2005]

So then, it must also be legal for me to put one of these devices on my wife's car, or on the local squad cars, without their knowledge? Why do different rules apply to government employees than apply to the rest of us?

Re:Sauce for the goose

[mbrod]

That's what I was thinking. What if someone puts these devices on all cop cars and creates an app to publish where they are all at real time? Bet they wouldn't like that, but would it be legal?

Re:Sauce for the goose

[meerling]

Considering the way some of them spaz out when they get photographed in a public place, they'd go totally ballistic. But it would be a great way to identify where the speed traps are.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[VEGETA_GT]

My question is, if I find a device on one of my motorcycles or car, is it legal for me to remove said strange device. One of those times I like being in Canada

Re:Sauce for the goose

[Whorhay]

Actually I'd think it a great time to sanitize the vehicle incase you were doing something naughty. Then call in the local news media and bomb squad. Nothing like advertising what the police are doing with the publics time and money and making them use up more of it sending out the bomb squad to remove their device.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[Captain Splendid]

^^This. If the police department starts becoming responsible for a bunch of overblown bomb hoaxes a la Boston, this idea will go down faster than a lead balloon.,

Re:Sauce for the goose

[BSDimwit]

Rights are not granted, they are inherent. Privileges are granted.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[buybuydandavis]

Recall the recent story about a school district where no one was found criminally liable for tapping the cameras of student laptops while they were at home. I think there was something like 50k images taken. You think maybe some of those were of minors partially clothed, or entirely nude? Masturbating? Having sex?

Would anyone but the government get away with wiretapping, video surveillance, and kiddie porn?

Re:Sauce for the goose

[Surt]

Lots of people care, but we long ago passed the point on the slippery slope where it will cost you your and your family's life to protest, but have not yet reached the point on the slope where it becomes likely to cost their lives NOT to protest.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[turkeyfish]

They can legally do it because the court says its legal. What part of the US judicial system don't you understand?

Thanks for all the platitudes, but the history of justice in the US is actually rather different from that you learned in grade school. You might want to brush up on an infamous character in the US southwest, Judge Roy Bean. His was a racket that enriched him at the expense of justice, all the while being perfectly legal. Keep in mind the tooth fairy is not actually real.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[Chris Burke]

The Ninth is the most over-ruled circuit in the entire country. Stay tuned.

By quantity, not ratio. It's by far the busiest circuit in the country. Most cases that go to SCOTUS are overturned (which makes sense as the Court would only see the case if there was some issue with the lower court's decision or a need to resolve it with other decisions), the 9th is overruled roughly as much as any other, e.g. in 2007 it was overruled 19/22 times, while the next busiest district was overruled 4/5 times.

So, I wouldn't bet on the results of the inevitable SCOTUS case based solely on the 9th's largely mythical "most overturned" status.

I'd like to bet on the results on the basis that it's fucking obviously a 4th Amendment violation. But if that reasoning worked, they wouldn't have ruled that way to begin with. :P

Re:Sauce for the goose

[Qzukk]

if you try to disable, remove, or relocate the device.

What device?

You have some kind of paperwork showing you put some sort of device on my car, I dunno, like a warrant or something? No? Well, then I guess you must have my car confused with someone else's because there was never any sort of device on my car.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[demonlapin]

Funny, the last time the cops pulled my wife over (for not having a seatbelt on as she turned off our home street) and she realized that she didn't have our current insurance card, I tried to come by and offer it to them. They didn't know the law (it makes it quite clear that the driver is NOT required to have the proof of insurance on their person, only to be insured, and that the police are required to make some attempt to verify the insured status if feasible), and told me that I would be arrested if I didn't vacate the scene immediately "for interfering with police business". And that it would be her fault if they shot me on a suburban street at 5:00 on Saturday afternoon. If that's not making up the law as you go, what is? Mind you, I'm 35, flabby, white, and drive a very boring, very new car. Any cop who thinks I'm a threat when I step out of a car with both hands visible and an insurance card in my hand waving hello is in need of a return to the academy.

Reasonable expectation of privacy

[zero_out]

Where I grew up, a person's driveway is most definitely within the domain of "reasonable expectation of privacy." And it's backed up with "git offa ma propertie! "

Why I despair

[DoofusOfDeath]

What really bothers me about stories like this is that the general public seems to not care.

I'm sure it's awful to live in a country where protesting the government will get you arrested or worse.

But it's a different kind of awful to have friends and neighbors who just can't be bothered to stick up for the civil rights of their fellow citizens.

Re:Why I despair

[Red Flayer]

But it's a different kind of awful to have friends and neighbors who just can't be bothered to stick up for the civil rights of their fellow citizens.

The problem is, that's not how they see it -- you're not asking them to stick up for the civil rights of their fellow citizens, you're asking them to stick up for the civil rights of criminals. In today's culture, suspicion == guilt.

Re:Why I despair

[gorzek]

Even in the comments to this article, at least one person echoed the common sentiment, "I don't do anything illegal so I have nothing to worry about."

People seem oblivious to the fact that, if these sorts of encroachments are tolerated, authorities will only seek more and more power--until something you do every day actually is illegal, and we'll have the monitoring infrastructure to back it up and enforce it.

It's like 4square for life

[ZuchinniOne]

Woo Hoo ... now I can finally keep track of which Strip Clubs to go to when I want to have a word with my Congressman.

Land of the free?

[santax]

I guess that is free as in beer? Having said that, here in the Netherlands it isn't much better. At least you guys are allowed to insult politicians.

Yet another reason

[iceaxe]

Yet another reason to take the bus or train.

Re:New market for GPS Jammers?

[Sprouticus]

You missed the finer points. Like the fact that they tresspassed on him driveway to plant the device...

Personally if driveways are public space, then I want to go setup a cookout on the driveway of one of these judges...

Re:Why should I worry?

[Cwix]

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Re:Why should I worry?

[Samalie]

This is the WORST possible argument one can give regarding the erosion of our rights.

It is never acceptable to give away our rights...regardless of whether we ever perceive we may need them. SHould I take away your right to free speech, because you don't speak about controversial topics? How about taking away your right to the free pratice of your religion? How about taking away your right to be secure in person & property...the government doesn't want my stuff, why should I care if they take away Joe's house?

For the love of god people...this shit is important to everyone. I can't believe anyone would say "Who cares?" when it comes to our rights & freedoms.

Re:Needs a Supreme Court ruling

[Sprouticus]

Why do Republicans equate limited government with civil rights. Arguably the largest civil rights movements in the last century (sufferage, civil rights movement, gay rights, creation vs evolution in schoold, brown vs board of educaiton, etc) have ALL come to fruition from larger government involvement, not less.

The question is not whether Kagan wants bigger government, but whether she puts the needs of law enforcement/government above the individual. Im guessing from her time at harvard that she will lean to the individual.
 

Re:Why should I worry?

[BlackSnake112]

How far till we are 'chipped' at birth?

It is somewhat unnerving when evil things mentioned in books and old TV shows become reality.

Re:Why should I worry?

[erroneus]

I don't think it will be illegal to detect or remove them or to destroy them.

There have been cases in the past where rights of ownership and possession become issues. So, if you happen to have a radio transmitter detector, or some other sort of detection device to determine that you have been bugged, you are pretty much free to remove it, sell it on ebay, whatever you like. SMART criminals (I know, there are way few of those) will know to check for them... but will probably also keep their vehicles secure.

People really don't know what is going on here and more significantly, don't WANT to know. Too often we use words like "conspiracy theory" to mean "obsessive and/or paranoid nutbag." And every time we hear something scary like this about our government, most people simply don't want to believe it and label anyone who speaks of it as a "conspiracy theorist." The psychology is the same for anyone who speaks for the truth about the holocaust. (The very fact that I said the word already has more than 50% of the people here ready to mod me down. I don't care, you are only showing who and what you really are by making presumptions without hearing what anyone has to say.)

We have "blank check laws" being passed without the people voting for them knowing what they really are. We have unconstitutional money seizure laws. We have secret rules and laws just for the DHL. (I know that's a fact because there was and still is a lot that TSA screeners cannot say or advise the public about... and I was actually a screener for a while) We have erosions and in some cases complete disregard for the constitution that was designed SPECIFICALLY to protect the people from "government." A constitution only works when the government follows it.