Computer Support Blog

With all of the recent uproar about the Stop Online Piracy Act, which many criticized as a potentially disastrous free speech violation, the major media outlets largely ignored the news out of the Supreme Court in January.  However, earlier this week, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in The United States Vs. Jones, creating one of the first explicit privacy protections in the digital age.

In U.S. Vs. Jones, the Supreme Court heard arguments involving the use of a GPS tracking device against a suspect without a warrant.  The police affixed a GPS tracking device on a suspect’s vehicle without a valid warrant (law enforcement had an expired warrant executable in a location outside the jurisdiction where the GPS device was applied to the suspect’s vehicle).  On January 23, the Supreme Court ruled that applying a GPS device to an automobile without a warrant was unconstitutional.

What is most interesting about the decision is that the Supreme Court divided over the reasoning behind the ruling.  Many United States citizens forget that privacy is not a Constitutionally-protected right or freedom in the United States.  Nowhere in the United States Constitution is there an explicit protection for freedom of privacy.  While liberal Justices since the founding of the United States have argued that privacy is an implied protection under Freedom of Speech, most conservative Justices have only used property rights violations (Fourth Amendment) to take the side of pro-privacy advocates.

The majority of the Supreme Court followed that same classic argument with U.S. Vs. Jones.  What is more significant is that conservative Justice Alito wrote a concurring opinion agreeing with the ruling – that search warrants are needed to apply a GPS device to a suspect’s vehicle – but disagreeing with the reasoning.  Alito and three other Justices argued that the violation to the suspect’s property was insignificant compared to the violation of the suspect’s inherent privacy rights.  Alito’s concurrent opinion harkens back to a Supreme Court ruling in 1967 that judged – in a wiretapping case – that the Fourth Amendment is intended to protect individuals, not their property.

This is a significant ruling – especially with the concurring opinion – because technology has been developing much faster than the law.  As a result, the Supreme Court has not ruled on privacy rights for simple actions like sending and receiving e-mail, using a smartphone to take or distribute photographs or using smartphone applications to record conversations until now.  While the debate in U.S. Vs. Jones may appear to have been limited to GPS devices, the unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court is thunderous in its implications.  At this critical juncture, the Supreme Court is siding with an individual’s right to live free from government scrutiny using advanced technology.

About RESCUECOM:

RESCUECOM provides computer repair and computer support, 24/7: Meeting every tech support need including data recovery, virus removal, networking, wireless services, and computer support for all brands of hardware and software. For computer support or information on products, services, or computer repair, visit https://www.rescuecom.com or call 1-800-RESCUE-PC.

For More Information, Contact:

David Milman, CEO

315-882-1100

david@rescuecom.com

Filed under: business, david milman, GPS, news, rescuecom, tips, winning