Feds Push for Tracking Cell Phones

From CNET News:

Two years ago, when the FBI was stymied by a band of armed robbers known as the “Scarecrow Bandits” that had robbed more than 20 Texas banks, it came up with a novel method of locating the thieves.

FBI agents obtained logs from mobile phone companies corresponding to what their cellular towers had recorded at the time of a dozen different bank robberies in the Dallas area. The voluminous records showed that two phones had made calls around the time of all 12 heists, and that those phones belonged to men named Tony Hewitt and Corey Duffey. A jury eventually convicted the duo of multiple bank robbery and weapons charges.

Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous at best. On Friday, the first federal appeals court to consider the topic will hear oral arguments (PDF) in a case that could establish new standards for locating wireless devices.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in their–or at least their cell phones’–whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that “a customer’s Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records” that show where a mobile device placed and received calls.

Those claims have alarmed the ACLU and other civil liberties groups, which have opposed the Justice Department’s request and plan to tell the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia that Americans’ privacy deserves more protection and judicial oversight than what the administration has proposed.

“This is a critical question for privacy in the 21st century,” says Kevin Bankston, an attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who will be arguing on Friday. “If the courts do side with the government, that means that everywhere we go, in the real world and online, will be an open book to the government unprotected by the Fourth Amendment.”

[Read more at CNET News]

, , , ,

  • RONIN

    Why don’t we just get rid of privacy laws altogether? I mean it seems, these days, like it’s just a matter of time until the feds deem anything, that prevents them from knowing everything about anyone, a hinderance. And as we all know, if you’ve nothing to hide, you’ve nothing to worry about. So what are we keeping this notion that a person should have privacy alive for anyways? What use does anyone have for privacy, from their own federal institutions at least, unless they’re guilty of something? What are we still playing this game for, in a time when we have Facebook and people posting every second of their lives on Twitter? What are we so afraid of?

  • RONIN

    Why don't we just get rid of privacy laws altogether? I mean it seems, these days, like it's just a matter of time until the feds deem anything, that prevents them from knowing everything about anyone, a hinderance. And as we all know, if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to worry about. So what are we keeping this notion that a person should have privacy alive for anyways? What use does anyone have for privacy, from their own federal institutions at least, unless they're guilty of something? What are we still playing this game for, in a time when we have Facebook and people posting every second of their lives on Twitter? What are we so afraid of?