New Federal Court Rulings Find Geofence Warrants Unconstitutional
eff.org
eff.org
There is another question here too: with more complex analysis like this, what is a good definition of a geofence? A 45min window around a busy intersection might catch a few 1000 people. But would the same geofence be OK if it was combines: who from intersection A in window1 was also at intersection B in window2? Presumably that would be OK if the number of people caught was lower compared to the number of criminals sought, and it would be much lower.
Finally, people should note that that data legally belongs to the company not the user. If Google agreed to cooperate (as mobile phone companies do) it would be entirely legal for all the data (and more) to be turned over and used, no questions asked.
The real problem here is that most of these rulings are sealed with no defendant. So it’s great that we had a judge looking out for the public here, but it is apparently far from the norm.
But can they get a warrant? Some business owners might say yes, but are they free to say no?
Security cameras can't see through walls to people with a reasonable expectation of privacy. A crime being committed down the street doesn't give the government the right to my webcam.
I think in certain extreme cases I would be ok with geofence warrants, but as the article mentions they are being used with increasing regularity.
Law and order is a myth that is pushed by those seemingly "above" it.
Or the outside agitators in the DHS, Border Patrol?
They can all be correct, technically.
And it might even be factually correct from both sides given a reasonable interpretation of "fact".
What will remain is your evaluation about which type of law breaking is more dangerous to the fabric of society. And that seems to be the fault line between left and right.
Personally I think government and cops breaking the law is corrosive in a unique way. This is a fairly broadly accepted view as well - it's why crimes by law enforcement and the judiciary have often been treated more harshly. It's a huge red flag when they are treated more leniently as it speaks of corruption that runs deep in the body politic.
That is not my understanding. I think if you look at the numbers you will see lower prosecution rates and lighter sentences for crimes committed by police.
But you're broadly right. I should have said "theoretically" instead of "often"
Yes, if all sides are saying law and order is a myth, they are probably all correct that it is.
I definitely agree with that.
I think you have figured out how to fix the criminal justice system!