Police Don't Need a Warrant To Track Your Disposable Cellphone

New submitter Blindman writes "The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that it is okay for police to track your cellphone signal without a warrant. Using information about the cell tower that a prepaid cell phone was connected to, the police were able to track a suspected drug smuggler. Apparently, keeping your cellphone on is authorization for the police to know where you are. According to the ruling (PDF), '[The defendant] did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the data emanating from his cell phone that showed its location.' Also, 'if a tool used to transport contraband gives off a signal that can be tracked for location, certainly the police can track the signal.'"

Comments

So it ends

[gatfirls]

...our reasonable expectation of privacy and the experiment of civil liberties. The sad thing is that we have lost a lot of them to "aid in fighting" un-winnable and/or lost wars.

Re:So it ends

[jamstar7]

So you're saying you advocate security through obscurity, rather than making the systems that use that information more secure by design such that I could publish those things and not worry?

More like, "That's nifty technology. Why can't you be bothered to get a warrant to use it for law enforcement purposes?"

Writs of Assistance

[rolfwind]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writ_of_assistance

In general, customs writs of assistance served as general search warrants that did not expire, allowing customs officials to search anywhere for smuggled goods without having to obtain a specific warrant. These writs became controversial when they were issued by courts in British America in the 1760s, especially the Province of Massachusetts Bay. Controversy over these general writs of assistance inspired the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which forbids general search warrants in the United States. In the United Kingdom, general writs of assistance continued to be issued until 1819.[6]

General writs of assistance played an important role in the increasing tensions that led to the American Revolution and the creation of the United States of America. In 1760, Great Britain began to enforce some of the provisions of the Navigation Acts by granting customs officers these writs. In New England, smuggling had become common. However, officers could not search a person's property without giving a reason. Colonists protested that the writs violated their rights as British subjects. The colonists had several problems with these writs. They were permanent and even transferable: a writ holder could assign them to another. Any place could be searched at the whim of the holder, and searchers were not responsible for any damage they caused. This put anyone who had such a writ above the law.

Idk, but between border control, the patriot act, and the drug wars, it seems to me that e have a whole lotta writs of assistance in this here "free" country.

Re:Why does "reasonable expectation" matter?

[avandesande]

If you have a unique flashing blue light on your car and police notice that it shows up at different drug sites in a pattern, are they supposed to ignore it? What is different about the EM radiation from a cellphone other than you not being able to see it?

Re:So it begins

[cpu6502]

Yeah they've been surveilling us for years.

And what do you expect? If you're driving down the highway and light is bouncing off your car, are police supposed to shut their eyes and stop intercepting the signal (thus letting you get away)? Whether the EM waves you are emitting are visible or not makes no difference.