Nov 082011
 November 8, 2011  Posted by  Court, Surveillance, U.S.

Another helpful write-up on oral argument this morning in United States v. Jones – this one by Kashmir Hill of Forbes, who starts her piece:

The Supreme Court justices were decked out in their usual black robes today for a case involving the question of whether police need to get a warrant in order to attach a GPS tracker to someone’s car. But given their paranoia about possible technology-enabled government intrusions on privacy, it might not have been surprising if they had also been wearing tin foil hats.

Read more on Forbes. Personally, I don’t think I’d describe concerns about widespread government intrusion on privacy as “paranoid,”  but I’m unabashedly a “privacy wonk.” I think some of the justices got it exactly right:  if the government prevails, there is nothing that stops the government from monitoring our movements in public 24/7/365 if they feel like investing in the technology – no warrant required.

The transcript of this morning’s oral argument can be found here and it makes for a fascinating read.


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.