High court: Warrant needed to plant GPS device on suspect's car
January 23rd, 2012
10:41 AM ET

High court: Warrant needed to plant GPS device on suspect's car

The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously for a drug suspect who had an electronic tracking device attached to his car by police, who did not first obtain an extended warrant.

The justices on Monday said secretly placing the device and monitoring the man's movements for several weeks constituted a government "search" and therefore the man's constitutional rights were violated.

Post by:
Filed under: Courts • Crime • Justice
soundoff (118 Responses)
  1. Kandi

    They voted on the side of the POLICE banasy, thats why they gave them the warrant. And its just a matter of time. Whats next? Web cams in every home?

    January 23, 2012 at 2:02 pm | Report abuse |
  2. ma & pa

    banasy at 1:47pm, your comment is among the truest on this blog today. We know. We are alive and free because truth, and the believers in it, have prevailed thus far against the framers.

    January 23, 2012 at 2:04 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Kandi

    Oops my apology banasy, i misread it, you are correct!

    January 23, 2012 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      @Kandi: No harm, no foul.

      January 23, 2012 at 8:49 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Cherry Pie

    Why do the police have to listen to Warrant before they can place a GPS surveillance device? Did we not get enough of this band in the 90's?

    January 23, 2012 at 2:16 pm | Report abuse |
  5. ma & pa

    @cedrik johnson at 11:35am, your advice is exactly WRONG. You can't have meant that, could you? That act gives up the battle to the instigators who use the police as their unwitting tools to do their dirtywork.

    January 23, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Report abuse |
  6. rooney©

    Good call Supreme Court! You did the right thing.

    January 23, 2012 at 5:46 pm | Report abuse |
  7. hamsta

    @banasy yes i did read the ruling.warrant or no warrant it should be illegal for police to track citizens with gps.was the guy on house arrest or something?NO. was he convicted of anything? NO. therefore the police had no authorization to invade the mans privacy whether or not they had a warrant.

    January 23, 2012 at 5:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Hamsta, I don't recall asking you if you had read the ruling.
      I don't recall really saying anything to you at all.
      What, precisely, is your point?
      The ruling rejected the police's premise.
      This guy won.
      Therefore, I do not understand the POINT of your post to me.

      January 23, 2012 at 8:54 pm | Report abuse |
  8. hamsta

    Welcome to 1984 are you ready for the third world war. you too will meet the secret police. they'll draft you and jail your neice.you'll go quietly to bont camp.shoot you dead make you a man on your way to afghanistan.feeding global corporations claws......

    January 23, 2012 at 5:59 pm | Report abuse |
  9. hamsta

    riot the unbeatable high adrenaline shoots your nerves to the sky.throwing a brick never felt so damn good smash with a blast scream with a laugh quickly die back into the crowd before you get caught......

    January 23, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Report abuse |
  10. hamsta

    @carniemechanic ya what you said. i totally agree. google cheewee haircut

    January 23, 2012 at 6:52 pm | Report abuse |
  11. rooney©

    @carniemechanic: I agree. A large majority of cops are like that, in my experience. But what is there to do? We need them.

    January 23, 2012 at 6:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • mickey1313

      um, no we do not. The police are 99% fraud. remember is the "law is a write, and act, a title, or a statute IS NOT A LEGALLY BINDING LAW. The police, like the ploiticians, need to be reminded that the citizens are the bosses and they are the employees, not the other way around.

      January 23, 2012 at 10:51 pm | Report abuse |
  12. leeintulsa

    Well, what do ya know? We are free to come and go as we please, imagine that..

    January 23, 2012 at 7:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Hello, leeintulsa.
      Yes, we are free to come and go as we please...
      I have no fears...do you?

      January 23, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
  13. ma & pa

    At this point in time, we do not know how invasive, controlling technology can be stopped. It is a Tool. That tool needs to be kept in the hands of only those who would use it to protect us. The bad guys had it and used it before the police did. Making laws against it's existence would mean all the power was in the hands of the bad guys because they mind paper restraints only enough to be unnoticed. We need to keep the elected and hired guys good and honest.

    January 23, 2012 at 8:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      ma and pa, your logic is indisputable, though many will not see it that way.

      January 23, 2012 at 8:57 pm | Report abuse |
  14. hamsta

    The thought police are coming next.

    January 23, 2012 at 8:33 pm | Report abuse |
  15. We All Won

    The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has won and is staying!! Kudos to the Supreme Court Justices for following the letter of the law as our forefathers intended should be done.

    January 23, 2012 at 8:49 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6