The Supreme Court says privacy prevails when it comes to police confiscating cell phones, flying in the face of Obama’s directives.
The decision by the court was unanimous, and is seen as a victory for proponents of less government intrusion on private information. The court is on a roll this year in opposing Obama.
Republican Ted Cruz has been critical of Obama’s stance on this issue. In a report by News Busters, Cruz is quoted as saying, “This is the eleventh time since January 2012 that the Supreme Court has unanimously rejected the Obama Administration’s arguments for greater governmental power.” Ted Cruz himself has argued cases before the nation’s high court.
h/t NBC News
In a sweeping decision in favor of digital privacy, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police almost always need a warrant to search a person’s cellphone, even in the case of someone placed under arrest.
In an unanimous decision, the court ruled against the Obama administration.
The usual law is that police can search anything on a person when they make an arrest. Opponents argued that smartphones were different because they hold such vast and personal stores of information.
“Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. Elsewhere in the decision, he said that phones are so pervasive that “the proverbial visitor from Mars might conclude they were an important feature of human anatomy.”
We can thank Anthony Weiner, in part, for the decision issued today by the Supreme Court. Who else was Chief Justice Roberts thinking of when he said cell phones have become a feature of human anatomy?