GPS Tracking: Justified Police Tactic or "Big Brother"?
The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether law enforcement officers must obtain a warrant before monitoring criminal suspects' vehicles through GPS devices.

January 06, 2012 /24-7PressRelease/ -- GPS Tracking: Justified Police Tactic or "Big Brother"?

If police had their way, they would continue to monitor criminal suspects using GPS devices without a warrant. No matter how much suspicion they have and without regard to the urgency of the situation, law enforcement officers want the power to attach a GPS device to a suspect's car and track its movements around the clock. Whether this is constitutional has yet to be determined.

High-Tech Crime Fighting vs. Individual Privacy

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether officers must first obtain a search warrant before using GPS vehicle tracking, an issue raising a debate in which privacy interests weigh against innovative law enforcement tactics. According to Bloomberg, the Obama administration believes warrantless GPS tracking is a "minimally intrusive" step that can yield important results in drug and terrorism cases.

Others are demanding that police first prove they have "probable cause" to believe the search will lead to evidence of crime. The criminal defense lawyer on the case, for instance, argued that GPS poses a "grave" threat to privacy. According to NPR, Justice Stephen Breyer voiced concern that if the Court decides warrantless GPS monitoring is constitutional, "there is nothing to prevent the police or the government from monitoring 24 hours a day the public movements of every citizen of the United States."

United States v. Jones

The case began when the FBI and local police placed a GPS device on a Maryland man's Jeep and began monitoring his whereabouts, according to Bloomberg. After a month of constant pinpoint tracking, officers followed him to a house where they seized 97 kilos of cocaine and $850,000. The man was convicted of several drug crimes, but an appeals court said the search and seizure violated the Constitution and overturned the conviction.

Advocates for individual privacy rights would certainly applaud a decision requiring warrants for GPS tracking. A ruling the other way, they believe, would open a dangerous new chapter in government surveillance of ordinary citizens, according to Bloomberg. Justice Breyer alluded to this sentiment by invoking George Orwell's 1984, one of five references to the novel during arguments, NPR reported.

Criminal defendants have constitutional rights that must be protected from unlawful police tactics, including investigative overreaching. An experienced criminal defense attorney can represent you during court proceedings and ensure that the government respects your rights under the constitution and laws of the U.S.

Press Release Contact Information:

FL Web Advantage