Down in the land of the 5th circuit, location information is “clearly a business record” and therefore exempt from protection under the Fourth Amendment? Are you kidding? The nature of a record (who decides this?) determines whether the law of the land can hold sway over it? What?
Another are you kidding: In any event, the court added, the use of cellphones “is entirely voluntary.”
Right. Entirely voluntary. Hey, for those of you who didn’t know, the omniscient dispensers of justice in the 5th circuit have now verified via edict: communicating, I mean cellphone use, is, actually, entirely voluntary.
Let’s pause and think about that. To separate the act of communication from the technology that enables it is impossible; we always communicate through tools of the day, and cellphones are the standard by which one survives. Do you remember the days without cellphones? Smartphones? Not having one is an extraordinary disadvantage. To say it’s voluntary is a bit like saying: “Survival is entirely voluntary.” Accept this court’s ridiculous perspective, and you can go ahead and get rid of that iPhone. No need to reach people, or be reachable, on the go in order to achieve anything in modern society. Right. What about landlines? Haha,hoho,hehe. Yes, let’s do that. That will certainly allow me to soar ahead of the competition as I hunt for jobs, fun, information, updates, and anything else that increases my chances for survival.
Another: The [ACLU] reviewed records from more than 200 local police departments last year, concluding that the demand for cellphone location data had led some cellphone companies to develop “surveillance fees” to enable police to track suspects.
So companies are making money off this. There is a business out of invading one’s privacy, without probable cause. No finer example of kicking ’em while they’re down.
A Fourth Amendment reminder: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Q: “But I’m not doing anything wrong. What do I care?” / A: Ask that when someone holding the bad-guy list changes their mind about what you’re doing. Under this ruling’s jurisdiction, Mr. Listmaster doesn’t even need a good reason to find out where you’ve been.