Mar 21, 2014
According toAssociated Press journalist Jack Gillum,
A Stingray device tricks all cellphones in an area into electronically identifying themselves and transmitting data to police rather than the nearest phone company's tower. Because documents about Stingrays are regularly censored, it's not immediately clear what information the devices could capture, such as the contents of phone conversations and text messages, what they routinely do capture based on how they're configured or how often they might be used.
In 2011 the FBI acknowledged that the stingray technology sweeps up cell-phone users who are not considered suspects. Yet, little is known about the technology, and police departments have repeatedly rejected public records requests from media outlets in California, Pennsylvania, and Florida.
Gillum reports:
journalist Beau Hodai and the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona sued the Tucson Police Department, alleging in court documents that police didn't comply with the state's public-records law because they did not fully disclose Stingray-related records and allowed Harris Corp. to dictate what information could be made public.
The ACLU is among those who have raised serious concerns about the technology and the manner in which law enforcement agencies have continued to hide the nature of their use.
"There is a real question as to whether stingrays can ever be used in a constitutional fashion," argued Linda Lye, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, in a blog post on the issue last week.
The technology, she continued, is "the electronic equivalent of dragnet 'general searches' prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. But unfortunately, there are currently no statutes or regulations that specifically address how and under what circumstances stingrays can be used, and very little caselaw."
_____________________
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare was a staff writer for Common Dreams from 2013-2016. She is currently web editor and reporter for In These Times.
According toAssociated Press journalist Jack Gillum,
A Stingray device tricks all cellphones in an area into electronically identifying themselves and transmitting data to police rather than the nearest phone company's tower. Because documents about Stingrays are regularly censored, it's not immediately clear what information the devices could capture, such as the contents of phone conversations and text messages, what they routinely do capture based on how they're configured or how often they might be used.
In 2011 the FBI acknowledged that the stingray technology sweeps up cell-phone users who are not considered suspects. Yet, little is known about the technology, and police departments have repeatedly rejected public records requests from media outlets in California, Pennsylvania, and Florida.
Gillum reports:
journalist Beau Hodai and the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona sued the Tucson Police Department, alleging in court documents that police didn't comply with the state's public-records law because they did not fully disclose Stingray-related records and allowed Harris Corp. to dictate what information could be made public.
The ACLU is among those who have raised serious concerns about the technology and the manner in which law enforcement agencies have continued to hide the nature of their use.
"There is a real question as to whether stingrays can ever be used in a constitutional fashion," argued Linda Lye, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, in a blog post on the issue last week.
The technology, she continued, is "the electronic equivalent of dragnet 'general searches' prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. But unfortunately, there are currently no statutes or regulations that specifically address how and under what circumstances stingrays can be used, and very little caselaw."
_____________________
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare was a staff writer for Common Dreams from 2013-2016. She is currently web editor and reporter for In These Times.
According toAssociated Press journalist Jack Gillum,
A Stingray device tricks all cellphones in an area into electronically identifying themselves and transmitting data to police rather than the nearest phone company's tower. Because documents about Stingrays are regularly censored, it's not immediately clear what information the devices could capture, such as the contents of phone conversations and text messages, what they routinely do capture based on how they're configured or how often they might be used.
In 2011 the FBI acknowledged that the stingray technology sweeps up cell-phone users who are not considered suspects. Yet, little is known about the technology, and police departments have repeatedly rejected public records requests from media outlets in California, Pennsylvania, and Florida.
Gillum reports:
journalist Beau Hodai and the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona sued the Tucson Police Department, alleging in court documents that police didn't comply with the state's public-records law because they did not fully disclose Stingray-related records and allowed Harris Corp. to dictate what information could be made public.
The ACLU is among those who have raised serious concerns about the technology and the manner in which law enforcement agencies have continued to hide the nature of their use.
"There is a real question as to whether stingrays can ever be used in a constitutional fashion," argued Linda Lye, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, in a blog post on the issue last week.
The technology, she continued, is "the electronic equivalent of dragnet 'general searches' prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. But unfortunately, there are currently no statutes or regulations that specifically address how and under what circumstances stingrays can be used, and very little caselaw."
_____________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.