The New Jersey
Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Thursday that police must
obtain search warrants before obtaining tracking information from cell phone
providers. The unanimous ruling marks the first time a state supreme court has
recognized a Fourth Amendment [Cornell LII backgrounder]
protection for cell phone location data. In the decision, Chief Justice Stuart
Rabner noted that cellphone tracking technology has the potential to violate a
person's privacy rights and must be subject to judicial review. Rabner also
noted that no warrants will be required in emergency situations.
I recognize that this is an interesting issue and
that the case highlights an important division in jurisdictions on whether the
Fourth Amendment applies to cell phone location data. This post is incorrect, however, to claim
that the New Jersey Supreme Court recognized a Fourth Amendment protection for
cell phone location data. While the
opinion nicely summarizes the relevant federal Fourth Amendment case law, pages
33-34 of the opinion make it very clear that the decision is based solely on
Article I, Paragraph 7 of the state constitution, which has historically been
the basis for greater protections than the Fourth Amendment (26).
Despite the opinion’s basis in state, rather than
federal, constitutional law, the opinion contains good discussion regarding the
rise of cell phone use and why users reasonably expect the locations of their
cell phones to be private.
No comments:
Post a Comment