alternative_right shares a report from The Hill: A federal judge in Mississippi ruled Wednesday that "tower dump" warrants are unconstitutional, declining to reverse a lower court decision refusing the government's request to obtain the search warrants in a series of violent crime investigations. A "tower dump" involves cellphone companies providing law enforcement with access to the time and location data of all mobile devices connected to specific cell towers during a designated time window.
Law enforcement had sought approval for several of these search warrants as part of criminal investigations into gang-related activity in the Jackson, Miss., area last year, arguing the data could help identify all those potentially involved, particularly in incidents with unknown suspects. A magistrate judge denied the applications, holding that "tower dumps" are impermissible general warrants. The district judge agreed. The order repeatedly referenced the Supreme Court's recent decision in Chatrie v United States, in which the majority held that geofence warrants require constitutional privacy protections.
"With this information, the Government asserts that it will be able to identify all potential suspects," Judge Carlton Reeves wrote in a 30-page order (PDF). "Even so, law enforcement would also have access to the cellular records of countless individuals, the vast majority of whom were merely passing by a location at the 'wrong' time."
"That is an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment," the judge concluded.
Law enforcement had sought approval for several of these search warrants as part of criminal investigations into gang-related activity in the Jackson, Miss., area last year, arguing the data could help identify all those potentially involved, particularly in incidents with unknown suspects. A magistrate judge denied the applications, holding that "tower dumps" are impermissible general warrants. The district judge agreed. The order repeatedly referenced the Supreme Court's recent decision in Chatrie v United States, in which the majority held that geofence warrants require constitutional privacy protections.
"With this information, the Government asserts that it will be able to identify all potential suspects," Judge Carlton Reeves wrote in a 30-page order (PDF). "Even so, law enforcement would also have access to the cellular records of countless individuals, the vast majority of whom were merely passing by a location at the 'wrong' time."
"That is an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment," the judge concluded.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
World Thru Lenz has added a photo to the pool:
:format(jpeg):fill(f8f8f8,true)/s3/static.nrc.nl/taxonomy/6cf24d7-Cijferblok_itemafbeelding.png)
:format(jpeg):fill(f8f8f8,true)/s3/static.nrc.nl/taxonomy/81f2d02-Koprol_itemafbeelding.png)
:format(jpeg):fill(f8f8f8,true)/s3/static.nrc.nl/taxonomy/06b57cb-AanZet_itemafbeelding.png)
:format(jpeg):fill(f8f8f8,true)/s3/static.nrc.nl/taxonomy/6c7bb5e-Vorto_itemafbeelding.png)