Oct 22, 2013
The case, U.S. v. Katzin, which was brought by the ACLU is being hailed as a victory in the fight against government surveillance.
Last year the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in U.S. v. Jones that attaching a GPS device to a citizen's vehicle constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. However, due to unclear wording in the case's ruling, police departments around the country have, until now, evaded having to attain warrants to do so.
"GPS devices have become a favored tool of law enforcement, and their highly intrusive nature cries out for clear judicial regulation," read the amicus brief filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Pennsylvania, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
"Today's decision is a victory for all Americans because it ensures that the police cannot use powerful tracking technology without court supervision and a good reason to believe it will turn up evidence of wrongdoing," said ACLU Staff Attorney Catherine Crump, who argued before the three-judge panel. "These protections are important because where people go reveals a great deal about them, from who their friends and business associates are to what doctors they go to."
_____________________
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Jacob Chamberlain
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
The case, U.S. v. Katzin, which was brought by the ACLU is being hailed as a victory in the fight against government surveillance.
Last year the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in U.S. v. Jones that attaching a GPS device to a citizen's vehicle constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. However, due to unclear wording in the case's ruling, police departments around the country have, until now, evaded having to attain warrants to do so.
"GPS devices have become a favored tool of law enforcement, and their highly intrusive nature cries out for clear judicial regulation," read the amicus brief filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Pennsylvania, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
"Today's decision is a victory for all Americans because it ensures that the police cannot use powerful tracking technology without court supervision and a good reason to believe it will turn up evidence of wrongdoing," said ACLU Staff Attorney Catherine Crump, who argued before the three-judge panel. "These protections are important because where people go reveals a great deal about them, from who their friends and business associates are to what doctors they go to."
_____________________
Jacob Chamberlain
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
The case, U.S. v. Katzin, which was brought by the ACLU is being hailed as a victory in the fight against government surveillance.
Last year the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in U.S. v. Jones that attaching a GPS device to a citizen's vehicle constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. However, due to unclear wording in the case's ruling, police departments around the country have, until now, evaded having to attain warrants to do so.
"GPS devices have become a favored tool of law enforcement, and their highly intrusive nature cries out for clear judicial regulation," read the amicus brief filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Pennsylvania, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
"Today's decision is a victory for all Americans because it ensures that the police cannot use powerful tracking technology without court supervision and a good reason to believe it will turn up evidence of wrongdoing," said ACLU Staff Attorney Catherine Crump, who argued before the three-judge panel. "These protections are important because where people go reveals a great deal about them, from who their friends and business associates are to what doctors they go to."
_____________________
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.