Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
The Courts Cellphones Privacy Your Rights Online

Supreme Court Rules Cell Phones Can't Be Searched Without a Warrant 249

New submitter CarlThansk (3713681) writes The courts have long debated on if cell phones can be searched during an arrest without a warrant. Today, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the police need warrants to search the cellphones of people they arrest. "Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the court, said the vast amount of data contained on modern cellphones must be protected (PDF) from routine inspection." Phones may still be searched under limited circumstances (imminent threats), but this looks like a clear win for privacy. Quoting the decision: "We cannot deny that our decision today will have an impact on the ability of law enforcement to combat crime. Cell phones have become important tools in facilitating coordination and communication among members of criminal enterprises, and can provide valuable incriminating information about dangerous criminals. Privacy comes at a cost."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Supreme Court Rules Cell Phones Can't Be Searched Without a Warrant

Comments Filter:
  • Double speak (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Trachman ( 3499895 ) on Wednesday June 25, 2014 @01:42PM (#47316809) Journal
    I think that we are getting deeper into the woods and Supreme Court can actually keep two opposing concepts in mind at the time and be ok with it. Supreme court decision covers police and says that police cannot spy on cellphone owners. Can somebody explain, if, then NSA, FBI, CIA, DHS, TSA, DIA and thousands of other agencies can continue spying? What if policeman will call his colleague at DEA, FBI and will ask for data: happens all the times. What about the usual process, where DIA employee working with NSA data while spying on US people will give a tip to local police to check "that person". Also, does the ruling cover only cellphones? What about the rest of devices, such as desktops, tablets etc. Ruling says that other devices are covered. The outcome is that spying and collection will continue as it has continued. People who have privacy concerns will be pacified with this ruling. Finest example of doublespeak and doublethink.
  • Well unless... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Redmancometh ( 2676319 ) on Wednesday June 25, 2014 @01:54PM (#47316927)

    This is great unless you're one of the 2/3 of people that live within 100 miles of the border in a "constitution exempt" zone.

  • by snsh ( 968808 ) on Wednesday June 25, 2014 @01:56PM (#47316955)

    During his confirmation hearings, Ted Kennedy noted that Sam Alito "never saw a police search he didn't like."

    Alito wrote up his own opinion on this decision, not-quite agreeing with the rest of the bench, but still voting against this particular search. I guess there's a first for everything.

Evolution is a million line computer program falling into place by accident.