Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

When It Comes To Spy Gear, Many Police Ignore Public Records Laws

Posted by timothy on from the muck-rocks! dept.

v3rgEz writes What should take precedence: State public records laws, or contractual agreements between local police, the FBI, and the privately owned Harris Corporation? That's the question being played out across the country, as agencies are strongly divided on releasing much information, if any, on how they're using Stingray technology to collect and monitor phone metadata without judicial oversight.

2 of 78 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The Constitution is Clear - Tenth Amendment by onproton · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "The test for whether one is living in a police state is that those who are charged with enforcing the law are allowed to break the laws with impunity." -- J. Roland

  2. Re:The Constitution is Clear - Tenth Amendment by radarskiy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I recommend that you clarify your comment or else someone might mistake you for believing that the States are sovereign rather than the people.

    Unlike the First Amendment, the Fourth through Sixth Amendments do not specifically constrain the federal government therefore they protect the people against the States as well. In addition, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment specifically constrains the states.