Posts

PA Cops No Longer Need a Warrant to Search Citizens’ Vehicles

/4 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: Lancaster Online

Photo Credit: Lancaster Online

Pennsylvania police officers no longer need a warrant to search a citizen’s vehicle, according to a recent state Supreme Court opinion.

The high court’s opinion, released Tuesday, is being called a drastic change in citizens’ rights and police powers.

Previously, citizens could refuse an officer’s request to search a vehicle. In most cases, the officer would then need a warrant — signed by a judge — to conduct the search.

That’s no longer the case, according to the opinion written by Supreme Court Justice Seamus McCaffery.

The ruling, passed on a 4-2 vote, was made in regard to an appeal from a 2010 vehicle stop in Philadelphia.

Read more from this story HERE.

Obama Administration Asks Supreme Court to Allow Warrantless Cellphone Searches

/1 Comment/in , /by

obama_shreds_constitutionIf the police arrest you, do they need a warrant to rifle through your cellphone? Courts have been split on the question. Last week the Obama administration asked the Supreme Court to resolve the issue and rule that the Fourth Amendment allows warrantless cellphone searches.

In 2007, the police arrested a Massachusetts man who appeared to be selling crack cocaine from his car. The cops seized his cellphone and noticed that it was receiving calls from “My House.” They opened the phone to determine the number for “My House.” That led them to the man’s home, where the police found drugs, cash and guns.

The defendant was convicted, but on appeal he argued that accessing the information on his cellphone without a warrant violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Earlier this year, the First Circuit Court of Appeals accepted the man’s argument, ruling that the police should have gotten a warrant before accessing any information on the man’s phone.

The Obama Administration disagrees…

Read more from this story HERE.

Grassley Office: Leahy Working Behind Closed Doors on Privacy Bill

/0 Comments/in , /by

Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley’s office leveled charges of working behind closed doors at Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and his office following allegations and denials that he is aiming to allow law enforcement’s push for warrantless surveillance.

Leahy’s office first used Twitter and his website to hit back against criticism following a Tuesday CNET report about the senator’s proposed amendment to a bill affecting two 1980s-era surveillance bills — the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act, and the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA).

Now Grassley, the committee ranking member, is charging that his office has been kept in the dark regarding the development of the bill.

Grassley spokeswoman Beth Levine told The Daily Caller on Wednesday that neither “Sen. Grassley nor his staff have seen the new legislation proposed by Sen. Leahy,” stating that the bill is being rewritten “behind closed doors.”

“But, judging by the concerns on both sides of the issue, it may be time to take a step back, hold additional hearings to address concerns, and discuss the issues being raised instead of rewriting the bill behind closed doors,” she added.

Read more from this story HERE.

Court OKs Warrantless Use of Hidden Surveillance Cameras on Private Property

/5 Comments/in , , /by

photo credit: fonstokPolice are allowed in some circumstances to install hidden surveillance cameras on private property without obtaining a search warrant, a federal judge said yesterday.

CNET has learned that U.S. District Judge William Griesbach ruled that it was reasonable for Drug Enforcement Administration agents to enter rural property without permission — and without a warrant — to install multiple “covert digital surveillance cameras” in hopes of uncovering evidence that 30 to 40 marijuana plants were being grown.

This is the latest case to highlight how advances in technology are causing the legal system to rethink how Americans’ privacy rights are protected by law. In January, the Supreme Court rejected warrantless GPS tracking after previously rejecting warrantless thermal imaging, but it has not yet ruled on warrantless cell phone tracking or warrantless use of surveillance cameras placed on private property without permission.

Yesterday Griesbach adopted a recommendation by U.S. Magistrate Judge William Callahan dated October 9. That recommendation said that the DEA’s warrantless surveillance did not violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and requires that warrants describe the place that’s being searched.

“The Supreme Court has upheld the use of technology as a substitute for ordinary police surveillance,” Callahan wrote.

Read more from this story HERE.