{"id":128320,"date":"2014-04-29T13:02:06","date_gmt":"2014-04-29T17:02:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/uncategorized\/supreme-court-to-hear-case-on-police-searches-of-cellphones.php"},"modified":"2014-04-29T13:02:06","modified_gmt":"2014-04-29T17:02:06","slug":"supreme-court-to-hear-case-on-police-searches-of-cellphones","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/fourth-amendment-2\/supreme-court-to-hear-case-on-police-searches-of-cellphones.php","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court to hear case on police searches of cellphones"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>WASHINGTON, April 28 (UPI) -- The  U.S. Supreme Court will hear two  cases regarding whether police searches of cellphones should  require a warrant to avoid violating the Fourth Amendment.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Fourth Amendment prohibits law enforcement and the    government from engaging in \"unreasonable searches and    seizures\" but the Justice Department is trying to exploit an    old loophole that allows a warrantless search to prevent the    destruction of evidence.  <\/p>\n<p>    The cases are among several that have tested the Constitution    in the digital age. The first case, which is being heard on    Tuesday, is Riley v. California. When David L. Riley    was pulled over for expired registration in San Diego in 2009,    police found guns in his vehicle and searched his smartphone,    which contained evidence linking him to a street gang. He was    arrested and convicted for attempted murder and sentenced to 15    years in prison.  <\/p>\n<p>    In its Supreme Court brief, California claims    information on cellphones \"is not different in kind from    wallets, address books, personal papers and other items that    have long been subject to examination.\"  <\/p>\n<p>    However, many argue now that smartphones carry troves of    personal data including communications, banking    information, health information and access to a person's social    media, it needs to be protected as that information would under    the Fourth Amendment.  <\/p>\n<p>    The original judge in the second case the court will hear,    United States v. Wurie, agreed with that sentiment    when he threw out the evidence collected from Brima Wurie's    cellphone after his call logs led to an arrest on drug and gun    charges.  <\/p>\n<p>    \"Today, many Americans store their most personal papers and    effects in electronic format on a cellphone, carried on the    person,\" Judge Norman H. Stahl wrote for a divided three-judge    panel.  <\/p>\n<p>    Riley's lawyers say the solution to the police's problem is as    simple as requiring them to put the phone in airplane mode    while they wait for a warrant or to disrupt the signal with    Faraday bags to prevent wiping.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>See the original post: <\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"http:\/\/www.upi.com\/Top_News\/US\/2014\/04\/28\/Supreme-Court-to-hear-case-on-police-searches-of-cellphones\/4151398700911\" title=\"Supreme Court to hear case on police searches of cellphones\">Supreme Court to hear case on police searches of cellphones<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> WASHINGTON, April 28 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court will hear two cases regarding whether police searches of cellphones should require a warrant to avoid violating the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment prohibits law enforcement and the government from engaging in \"unreasonable searches and seizures\" but the Justice Department is trying to exploit an old loophole that allows a warrantless search to prevent the destruction of evidence <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/fourth-amendment-2\/supreme-court-to-hear-case-on-police-searches-of-cellphones.php\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"limit_modified_date":"","last_modified_date":"","_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[261461],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-128320","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-fourth-amendment-2"],"modified_by":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128320"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=128320"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128320\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128320"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128320"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128320"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}