SCOTUS rules that a warrant is required for GPS surveillance!

[thewayne]

"In all, five justices said physically attaching the GPS device to the underside of a car amounted to a search requiring a warrant. Four justices, however, said the prolonged GPS surveillance in this case - a month - amounted to a search requiring a warrant, but was silent on whether GPS monitoring for shorter periods would require a warrant. All

Comments

[silveradept]

Wow. SCOTUS actually says law enforcement might need to get a warrant. That's not their usual style.

[thewayne]

Well, the nature of GPS tracking is very different. As long as you can afford the GPS units, you can monitor a huge amount of people, amounting to a fishing expedition. They want to make sure that there is an actual probable cause that can be elucidated upon to a judge, and that's definitely a good thing. It does seem against the style of recent rulings, and that's a good thing.