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

[ElectricTurtle]

I think somebody should put GPS transmitters on the Ninth Circuit justices' cars immediately, and register wheremyjudgesat.com.

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

[Anon-Admin]

You are looking at this wrong, here in the USA the laws do not tell us what we can do, they tell us what we can not do.

So, if it is not considered a violation of the 5th amendment and there is no law saying "You can not attach GPS devices to police cars" or "You can not monitor police" or any variation there of, then it is legal.

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

[eth1]

No, no, if you're going to put GPS trackers on officials' vehicles, you don't want to just publish the coordinates of everywhere they go. That would very quickly lead to the discovery and removal of said device.

Wait till they go somewhere questionable, then "coincidentally" show up with a camera and publish pics instead. The tracker will survive longer, and the evidence will be much harder to refute. :)

Re:Sauce for the goose

[Beardo the Bearded]

Cops are lazy.

They put the speed traps in high-revenue spots over and over again. There's a pattern. There are GPS units that list all the known speed traps and warn you as you approach. There's no radar to jam, no lasers to thwart, just the position of known speed traps.

Er, sorry, what I meant to say was that since the police would only enforce the speed limits in areas that are particularly dangerous to speed in, it warns you to slow down as you approach a hazardous area.

Also, the GPS tracker would have to chirp to send out your data. It would probably be of VHF since that's unregulated (148 - 152 MHz is a good one) so all you'd have to do is check for broadcasts of that frequency. GPS refreshes at 1Hz, so that's probably what they would chirp at unless they're using burst downloads.

FYI, the range on GPS / VHF transmissions in urban environmentsis very short. It gets unreliable after a few hundred meters and it completely thwarted by brick.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[Beardo the Bearded]

It would cost about $300 for the tracker. The receiver would be about $1000. I used to work at a place that tracked animals via GPS / VHF collars for wildlife researchers. There were a few cases where the animal would look, shall we say, rather humanoid, but in all of those cases that was a willing animal.

Anyway, that $300 would get you a GPS unit with antenna, a processor board with memory, and a VHF transmitter that sends out the location. They'd be able to read that location on the receiver. The battery would be a Lithium cell and would run for up to a year. It would be potted for weather proofing. If they had reusable batteries, then you'd be able to use the units pretty much indefinitely.

It could also be set up to record your location throughout the day at intervals no finer than 1/second. (Civilian GPS refreshes that fast, and there's no way they could get their hands on milspec.) It could easily save up the data and broadcast it at a set time (like 3am when you're asleep or 4pm when you're at work) and the receiver would get all the locations you've been in the last day. It only takes about 8 bytes to store a GPS location, so an 8Mbit Flash module is enough to store a year's worth of locations. This would all be on a board roughly 1" x 1.5" x 0.5", plus battery and antenna.

Re:Sauce for the goose

[icebike]

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has also ruled that a warrant is required. Reported here on /. less than 20 days ago.

This decision is bound for the SCOTUS because you can not have different laws in one part of the country as compared to another part due to the Equal Protection Clause.

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

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

[youngone]

That happened in NZ last year. The guy involved wound up in court arguing that the device belonged to him, as the Police had left it on his car. He won too.

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! "

Re:Reasonable expectation of privacy

[gurps_npc]

I agree with you and the dissenting Judge Kozinski (Regan appointee). Judge Kozinski said that the court was prejudiced against poor people, taking away their rights simply beause they could not afford a garage He was right, your driveway is your property, people have an expectation of privacy on it.

Re:Reasonable expectation of privacy

[Vancorps]

You could very easily argue that installing gear without your knowledge to your car while in your driveway would be considered vandalism. I'm just uncertain why they can't get a warrant to do it. There seems to be a war on oversight for the last decade and realistically even longer. When it become bad to have to justify your actions? In the case of FISA you don't even have to justify it before you do it.

Needs a Supreme Court ruling

[gurps_npc]

Other District Courts of appeals have ruled it illegal. Right now, it is illegal in Washington DC, but legal in California. Time for Kagan to show us what she's made of.

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.
 

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.

The Ninth Circuit

[jgtg32a]

I've been sitting here for 5 min trying to come up with a snarky comment, but the shear stupidity of this has rubbed off on me and I've got nothing.

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.

Just build yourself on of these

[scharkalvin]

http://www.ladyada.net/make/wavebubble/

Then they won't see ya!

Countermeasures

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Okay, so, as a citizen of California, I have a question for the Slashdot techies out there. These GPS trackers that can be tacked onto my vehicle. How large are they? What do they resemble? Do they give off any transmission signal/EM radiation of some sort. I am personally appalled by this particular ruling, but if that's how things are going to be, then let the arms race begin. I want to know what, exactly, these GPS trackers do. Do they transmit your location data back to the GPS sat system? Or do they transmit to some kind of local receiver? Do we know that frequency they transmit on?

If the police and government are going to take active duty to track all citizens, without the burden of providing a reasonable level of suspect, then I say we, as citizens fight back for our rights. If the local police want to track our vehicles, what kind of devices can we hack together to detect these nasty little tracker chips? There has to be some way to build a receiver similar to whatever the police use to detect the GPS data, attach it to a small wand or golf club or something, and wave it around our car every time we get in it to make sure the trackers are not installed. So, GPS nerds out there, how's about we start putting together a How-To to homebrew a GPS tracker detector? Then, if we find a tracker attached to our vehicle, we can simply pull it off and duct tape it to the local stray cat.

Re:Countermeasures

[topham]

The trend is towards cellular phone style devices; GSM or CDMA radios with GPS unit. No keypad or screen required so they can be quite small. Battery life is an issue, however they go to sleep of they aren't moving so they only need to work for the duration of a trip.

Yet another reason

[iceaxe]

Yet another reason to take the bus or train.

Before this ruling...

[cvtan]

an aluminum foil hat was enough. This guy is way ahead of the curve: http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01407/foil-car_1407008i.jpg

Criminalize it and only criminals will have it.

[HeckRuler]

This has already been circumvented.
So the cops are going after lay citizens and stupid crooks, a fair number of which really do deserve to be caught.

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:TFA kind of sucks

[BobMcD]

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/view_subpage.php?pk_id=0000010204

Re:Heh

[stonewallred]

Anyone with a lick of sense knows that lag in WoW is caused by Cheney contacting his dark slave Satan for his weekly updates via the web. Seems old Cheney is too cheap to buy a T1 line to hell.

Re:New market for GPS Jammers?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I can understand why this decision turned out the way it did. Placing a tracking device on your vehicle is about the same as following you around with an unmarked vehicle.

The primary difference being that it can be conducted en masse - i.e. its possible to track thousands of vehicles without committing any significant manpower. I have a similar problem with ANPR - one unattended machine can do what would otherwise take thousands of officers to do.

The cliched response to both of these examples is "you have no expectation of privacy in public" - but that is a legal principle formulated in a simpler time before automation (especially automation on the back-end) was even conceivable. I think a principle more suited to the current situation (which will only become more extreme as the automation on the back-end becomes more and more capable) is that if surveillance requires resources not normally available to the average citizen then it requires a warrant. I think a principle along those lines more closely matches how the average joe sees the world, which is pretty much the definition of "reasonable."

As the purpose of a warrant is to maintain oversight to prevent abuse, it makes even more sense because more power always equals more temptation for abuse so being able to do something that a normal person can't reasonably do is practically by definition more opportunity for abuse.

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?

[The Moof]

I am a law abiding citizen

Until they decide you aren't.

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.