In re Telephone Info (Cousins)
When the U.S. Attorney's Office in San Francisco applied for an order to obtain historical cell site records, federal magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins wondered why the government did not believe it needed to apply for a search warrant to get this detailed location information of which cell phone towers a particular phone connects to. After the government explained why it did not believe it needed a search warrant, Judge Cousins invited the San Francisco Federal Defender to file a response.
EFF filed an amicus brief in support of the Federal Defender's argument that the government needed to use a search warrant to obtain historical cell site data. Our amicus brief argues there is a growing societal recognition that it is reasonable to expect privacy in cell phone data that reveals a person's location, as reflected by a growing number of state courts and legislatures requiring law enforcement use a search warrant to obtain this sensitive information. Our amicus brief also notes the California constitution specifically treats telephone records as private.
Updates
-
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 1979 decision of Smith v. Maryland turned 35 years old last week. Since it was decided, Smith has stood for the idea that people have no expectation of privacy in information they expose to others. Labeled the third party “doctrine” (even by EFF ...
-
When courts issue new decisions about how law enforcement can obtain records and data from companies, it's not just the police who have to follow the new rules. The companies that turn over the data have a big role to play in ensuring that the law is followed. A...
-
Massachusetts police must now get a search warrant before they can track a person's past movements through their cell phone in an important new decision that has implications beyond just cell tracking in the Bay State.
In Commonwealth v. Augustine, state police relied on federal law to...
-
As the highest court in Massachusetts considers whether cell-site data is private in the context of the Fourth Amendment, we filed an amicus brief arguing that when the police want to be able to recreate your every step—figuring out your patterns of movement, where you've been and with...
-
A Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling this week will make it easier for police to track your movements through your cell phone after the court decided police aren't required to obtain a search warrant to track you.
The case involved a 2010 law enforcement request to obtain...
Pages
