Jan 242012
 January 24, 2012  Posted by  Court, Featured News, U.S.

Nabiha Syed provides a roundup of responses to the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Jones that warrantless attachment of a GPS tracking device constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment.  You can also find a selection of thoughts and commentaries on Concurring Opinions.  Note that deciding that attaching a GPS to a car is a search under the Fourth Amendment is not the same as deciding that it always requires a warrant or that this particular search was unreasonable. But it’s still a pretty positive outcome for privacy advocates.

On first read of the decision, I find myself pleasantly surprised by Justice Scalia’s opinion, which seems to take a more expansive and protective approach than concurring opinions that focus on privacy but not trespass.   I have yet to really sit down and digest it all, though.

Scott Greenfield provides his own take on the opinion and concurring opinions.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.