Politics

Topic   Carpenter vs. US

Scots
GameTZ Gold Subscriber Triple Gold Good Trader Global Trader - willing to trade internationally
29-Nov(#1)
Orals in SCOTUS today. This case is flying under the radar but has huge implications for the 4th amendment and privacy in the digital age.

The government is essentially arguing that by having a cell phone, you are voluntarily providing information your phone provides through its network (location, whereabouts, movement, logs, etc.) to a third party, and the government can freely access it without a warrant.

The other side will likely argue that having a cell phone isn't really voluntary, but a necessity these days. So a warrant is necessary to search the property, digital or otherwise.

Brief overview: https://www.lawfareblog.com/supreme-court-grants-c...
Karaiya
Gold Good Trader Has Written 1 Review
29-Nov(#2)
Thanks for making us aware. Wow! This is really huge.
yankees7448
Bronze Good Trader
1-Dec(#3)
Scots wrote:
> Orals in SCOTUS today. This case is flying under the radar but has huge implications
> for the 4th amendment and privacy in the digital age.
>
> The government is essentially arguing that by having a cell phone, you are voluntarily
> providing information your phone provides through its network (location, whereabouts,
> movement, logs, etc.) to a third party, and the government can freely access it without
> a warrant.
>
> The other side will likely argue that having a cell phone isn't really voluntary,
> but a necessity these days. So a warrant is necessary to search the property, digital
> or otherwise.
>

Interesting. I don't know much about the case but from what you put here I would prefer that government not win but they seem to have the more sensible argument. Cell Phones are not a necessity. Its really annoying to try to meet up with people who don't have cell phones or reach them in an emergency but technically it is not an emergency.

Topic   Carpenter vs. US