Supreme Court To Review GPS Tracking Case
20 Apr 2011On April 15th, the Obama Administration petitioned the Supreme Court to review a significant “digital age” privacy case: whether the police must have a warrant before using a global positioning system (GPS) device to track a suspects’ movements.
The initial ruling made last summer stated that law enforcement officers cannot use GPS technology to track a suspects’ car without first getting a warrant.The Obama Administration opposes obtaining warrants for GPS tracking and wants the Supreme Court to examine the issue.
The review stems from an administration appeal of a lower court criminal conviction reversal ruling based upon no secured warrant by the police for the GPS device they installed secretly on a man’s car. In the case, law enforcement placed a GPS tracking device on Antoine Jones of Washington, D.C. Jeep and, for a month, tracked his movements. Jones, a nightclub owner, was convicted of operating a cocaine distribution ring. However, a three-panel judge of both Republican and Democratic appointees unanimously threw out Jones’ life sentence and conviction, stating that prolonged surveillance violating Jones’ privacy rights was an important element in their decision. According to the Washington federal appeals court, the officers violated the Fourth Amendment prohibition relating to unreasonable searches.
In accordance with the Obama Administration opposition to this ruling, the Justice Department is asking the Supreme Court to examine whether federal agents violated the Fourth Amendment when they attached a GPS satellite tracking device to his car unknowingly and without a warrant during a drug-trafficking investigation.
In 1983, with the Supreme Court’s blessing, a beeper was used to track a suspect to his drug laboratory. The government argues that using a GPS tracking device is no different. The Justice Department believes that in early stages of an investigation, GPS tracking devices are useful since they eliminate time-consuming stake outs needed to gather evidence.
On the other hand, the court argues then that people driving on public roads won’t have real reasonable privacy expectations. In another case, a panel of three judges upheld the ruling of the use of a GPS device without a warrant, indicating that it’s no different from police officers tailing a suspect.
The Justice Department is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve this federal appellate courts conflict over whether law enforcement officials must obtain a warrant before utilizing a GPS device to covertly follow a person’s movements. A prompt resolution of these divergent opinions is critical to law enforcement, according to the Justice Department. Stay tuned.
Comments are closed.