SCOTUS Blog Case: US vs. Jones
In US vs. Jones, the court was investigating whether it was legal or not, for the FBI to without a warrant or permission, put a GPS on Jone's Jeep. He was a suspected drug dealer, he was sentenced to life in prison.
"1. Whether the warrantless use of a GPS trackingdevice on respondent’s vehicle to monitor its movementson public streets violated the Fourth Amendment.
2. Whether the government violated respondent’sFourth Amendment rights by attaching the GPS tracking device to his vehicle without a valid warrant and without his consent"
So, the police attached a GPS-tracker on his car, in order to track the location on the streets. The court argued that it is not illegal to monitor cars on public streets, if a car is parked on a public street it is not private. Jone's argued that it is not what the police obtained, but how they did it. Jone's argument was whether they were allowed search him or not. After the court case, it came down to the fact that he was always on public streets. That being the case, he warranted his privacy unless he was parked on private property. Another defense was that ten years ago this would've been a bigger operation, but because of social networking, you allow people to monitor you all the time, so why can't the police. I believe that Jones will lose, because the government really didn't do anything. They turned a stakeout, into an easier, less expensive operation.
"1. Whether the warrantless use of a GPS trackingdevice on respondent’s vehicle to monitor its movementson public streets violated the Fourth Amendment.
2. Whether the government violated respondent’sFourth Amendment rights by attaching the GPS tracking device to his vehicle without a valid warrant and without his consent"
So, the police attached a GPS-tracker on his car, in order to track the location on the streets. The court argued that it is not illegal to monitor cars on public streets, if a car is parked on a public street it is not private. Jone's argued that it is not what the police obtained, but how they did it. Jone's argument was whether they were allowed search him or not. After the court case, it came down to the fact that he was always on public streets. That being the case, he warranted his privacy unless he was parked on private property. Another defense was that ten years ago this would've been a bigger operation, but because of social networking, you allow people to monitor you all the time, so why can't the police. I believe that Jones will lose, because the government really didn't do anything. They turned a stakeout, into an easier, less expensive operation.
Comments
No comments have been posted yet.
Log in to post a comment.