Governmental Tracking of Cell Phones and Vehicles

Introduction

• Technological advancements impact privacy and law.
• Law enforcement uses cell phones and GPS for tracking.
• The balance between privacy and technology involves constitutional and statutory considerations.

Fourth Amendment and Privacy

• Fourth Amendment: Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
• Evolving interpretation due to technology (e.g., Katz v. United States).
• Key legal question: What constitutes a reasonable expectation of privacy?

Federal Surveillance Statutory Framework

• Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA): Governs electronic communication privacy.
  • Pen Registers, Trap and Trace, Wiretaps, and Tracking Devices.
  • Standards for accessing electronic communications.
• Evidentiary Standards Under ECPA:
  • Tiers of proof: Wiretap Act > Tracking Devices > Stored Communications Act > Pen Register/Trap Trace.

Cell Phone Surveillance in the Courts

• Federal courts differ on standards for accessing cell site information.
• Third Circuit: Allows less stringent standards unless Fourth Amendment is violated.
• Ongoing debate in courts regarding historical vs. real-time information.

Governmental Surveillance of Vehicles

• United States v. Knotts: Public roadway surveillance without a warrant allowed.
• United States v. Karo: Warrant required for monitoring in private residences.
• United States v. Jones: Supreme Court reviews long-term GPS tracking without a warrant.

Current and Pending Legislation

• Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act of 2011 (S. 1011):
  • Requires warrants for geolocation information.
  • Emergency exceptions.
• Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act (GPS Bill; S. 1212 and H.R. 2168):
  • Establishes warrant requirements for geolocation data.
  • Prohibitions on unauthorized use and disclosure.

Conclusion

• Ongoing legal and legislative efforts to address privacy concerns in the context of advancing technology.
• Supreme Court cases and Congressional bills could reshape privacy and surveillance laws.

Important Cases

• Katz v. United States: Established "reasonable expectation of privacy."
• Smith v. Maryland: No expectation of privacy in phone numbers dialed.
• Knotts and Karo cases: Addressed differing circumstances in GPS tracking and privacy.
• United States v. Jones: Prolonged GPS tracking under scrutiny.