119 pages. Have to read this weekend and brief our LEO on Monday. Will have more
Well....that’s kind of what a law enforcement investigation is. Following the leads, developing suspects, and then getting information establishing probable cause to arrest and beyond a reasonable doubt to prosecute. Law enforcement routinely gets cell phone location information in an investigation, just like in this case, and there is nothing wrong with that. Hell, I’ve drafted a whole lot of applications for CTLI just like the one used in this case.
There is a specific federal statute that states you don’t have to have probable cause to get that data (merely that it is reasonably material and relevant to a criminal investigation). The reasoning when the law was passed was that someone doesn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy in data and information they voluntarily surrender to a third party. The request was subjected to scrutiny by the Judge signing the court order for disclosure.
MyTL;DR (yet) evaluation is that the SCOTUS said that statute violates the 4th Amendment because individuals do have a reasonable expectation of privacy in those records. In the end, it’s not a huge change from having to show materiality and relevance to get these through the statute to having to show probable cause to get them through a warrant.
The freedom loving private citizen side of me will like this decision. The authoritarian officer of the oppressive state apparatus will likely be only mildly annoyed by it....mostly because I’m certain my LEOs will bitch and moan about it and I will have to do a little more work to get these records.
I’m reading with an aim to try to predict where the court might go with such things as subscriber info, etc. that isn’t CTLI.
