Cell phones cannot be searched without a warrant. Image: Shutterstock |
Arguments in favor of searches without a warrant claimed
that searches of digital devices for information were comparable to searches
police officers often conduct for contraband after making an arrest. That
argument was resoundingly flattened by the SCOTUS’ decision.
“That is like saying a ride on horseback is materially
indistinguishable from a flight to the moon,” wrote
Chief Justice Roberts in the decision. “Both are ways of getting from point
A to point B, but little else justifies lumping them together. Modern cell
phones, as a category implicate privacy concerns far beyond those implicated by
the search of a cigarette pack, a wallet, or a purse.”
Roberts also argued that searches of a cell phone were more
a violation of privacy than a search of the home, which is typically considered
one of the most sacred places for privacy:
“A cell phone search would typically expose to the
government far more than the most exhaustive search of a house: A phone not
only contains in digital form many sensitive records previously found in the
home; it also contains a broad array of private information never found in a
home in any form – unless the phone is.”
Roberts also noted that though we now have the technology available to carry such
private information around in our pocket, that does not make it “any less
worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought,” bringing to light once
more the fact that technological advancements no longer fit within the
established legal framework—therefore making it difficult for law enforcement officers
to come to a consensus on what is acceptable when making arrests.
Post a Comment