The Right to Keep Personal Data Private: Carpenter v. U.S.

The Supreme Court could in this case make major strides in ensuring that Fourth Amendment protections keep pace with advancing technology.

In 2011, FBI agents in Detroit obtained several months’ worth of location records from cellphone companies for suspects in a robbery investigation — all without a warrant. They were able to do so because of an outdated legal theory called the “third-party doctrine” that has been used by law enforcement to access personal data without ever having to demonstrate probable cause to a judge.

Infographic: A Surveillance Time Machine

Timothy Carpenter, represented by the ACLU, argues that the government violated his Fourth Amendment rights when it obtained his location records without a warrant. The court’s decision in the case will also have implications for the extent of the Constitution’s protections against warrantless search and seizure of much of the private data collected and stored by current  technologies.

What is this case about?

Every time a cellphone makes or receives a call or  text message or accesses a wireless data connection — as when it automatically checks for emails or social media messages — the phone company logs and retains a record of the phone’s location based on the cell tower and cellular antenna the phone was connected to. The volume and precision of that location data has increased over time, and today, cellphone location data can paint a detailed picture of where we go over the course of days, weeks, and months. The question in this case is whether the Fourth Amendment protects that data by requiring police to get a search warrant from a judge before requesting it from the phone company.

What is the third-party doctrine and why does it matter?

The third-party doctrine says that by sharing information or records with a “third party,” meaning a business or another person, a person gives up any reasonable expectation that the information will remain private.  The doctrine was established in Supreme Court cases from the 1970s, which reasoned that without an expectation of privacy, there is no Fourth Amendment protection for certain records voluntarily shared with businesses, such as canceled checks sent to a bank or phone numbers dialed on a phone and transmitted over a phone company's equipment. The government, along with some lower courts, have extended that principle to cover all kinds of sensitive digital records. But as Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote several years ago, “[t]his approach is ill suited to the digital age, in which people reveal a great deal of information about themselves to third parties in the course of carrying out mundane tasks."

How would this case affect data collection beyond cellphones?

If the justices were to apply the government’s 1970s-era view of the third-party doctrine to cellphone location data,  it could throw open a huge array of highly sensitive digital records to warrantless access by police. Today, our most sensitive records aren’t necessarily held in homes and cabinets. They’re held by third parties. The contents of emails, text messages, and social media messages are stored by companies like Google, Verizon, and Facebook; family photos reside with Apple, Flickr, and the like; and information about health conditions, relationships, finances, political opinions, sexual orientation, and daily habits is stored on servers of the many companies that provide internet service and smartphone apps. And as the “internet of things” begins to take off, we will see information about the interior of our homes and the state of our bodies being constantly collected and stored in the cloud. It is critical that the Supreme Court explain that the Fourth Amendment protections these kinds of data.

What are the options before the Supreme Court?

The broad question before the court is whether law enforcement’s warrantless acquisition of historical cellphone location data violates the Fourth Amendment. If the court decides that this constitutes a Fourth Amendment search, it could further rule that a warrant is required -- as it should — or it could send the case back to the lower court for further consideration. This is the latest in a series of recent cases in which the Supreme Court has made clear that interpretations of the Fourth Amendment must keep up with evolving technology.  The court’s decision will set a precedent for years to come, making it crucial that it ensures that the police are subject to limits on search and seizure in the digital age.  

More on our upcoming Supreme Court cases

View comments (22)
Read the Terms of Use

Erika McGinty

Thank you for this informative post!

T

I hear u loud and clear. I'm not quite clear on how this isnt a pressing issue. Over the last 2 years these isssues r getting broader. We need to nip it in the butt and narrow down the safest plan for citizens in the US. Wish the news would stop giving civilians distractions that r unproductive and irresponsible and down right dangerous. It ain't about the money, is about serenity and peace of mind America

StephenMcCaffrey

First of all thank you so much for this share 'The Right to Keep Personal Data Private'!
I must read it. Why because today we are in the generation of technology. then we should have the awareness on the topic about privacy. Most of them are with lack of awareness on that 'is our privacy or secrets are private?'. So the scope of this topic is not at all a simple one. I was asking with https://essayreviewratings.com/ for a topic to write an essay. I think I can choose this topic 'data privacy' as my essay subject.

Phil

Check more similar information on this page! https://nerdymates.com/blog/movie-review

Anonymous

Tahun Baru Di Villa Puncak

Menjelang tahun baru kakak kesatu ku ngajak nginep semalam di villa Puncak, tepatnya tanggal 30-31 Desember 2016, hari Jumat-Sabtu. Aku inginkan  dong, lagipula  dibayarin. Rencananya peserta tiga keluarga, jumlah totalnya 10 orang. Kenapa gak sekalian tahun baruan di Puncak aja? Karena yang bayarin cuma dapat  hari itu, lagian gak terdapat  tradisi merayakan tahun baru di keluargaku. Aku bertugas nyari villa di puncak, saat tersebut  hari Selasa, agak pesimis sebab  dadakan banget, menilik  saat tersebut  masa liburan sekolah dan cuti  akhir tahun. Untunglah di di antara  situs booking hotel online dapet pun  yang cocok  dengan kebutuhan. Lokasinya dekat Kota Bunga Cipanas, villa 4 kamar istirahat  dengan 2 kamar mandi. Dan kalo diperlukan  ada 1 kamar istirahat  dengan kamar mandi dalam yang dapat  dipakai dengan ongkos  tambahan. Yang pun  penting terdapat  mesin karaoke…yeayy!!

Aku baru dapat  pergi sesudah  suami sholat Jumat. Dan ternyata bisa  kabar kakak keduaku dan keluarganya seketika  berhalangan hadir, wahh…jadi ada keunggulan  kamar dong, tidak cukup  seru peserta gak lengkap. Padahal kakak keduaku udah nyiapin konsumsi guna  kita nginep, gimana ini nasib makan-makan kita? Aku yang saat tersebut  udah dijalan hanya  bawa mie instan, telor, dan roti, maklum anak bungsu biasa tau beres, bercita-cita   dari kakak-kakak aja. Kakak kesatu ku dan keluarganya udah nyampe villa duluan, ngajak santap  diluar aja nanti, males masak.

Aku hingga  di villa senja  hari, perjalanan ke Puncak lumayan  lancar, meski  Jalan Raya Puncak sempat terdapat  buka tutup diluar jadwal biasa, gak apa deh nunggu di pinggir jalan demi kelancaran. Kami sempat lewat jalur pilihan  dekat pasar Ciawi tembus di Cisarua, namun  gak aku sarankan deh, jalannya sempit, tidak sedikit  beloknya dan nyaris  di masing-masing  belokan ada warga  yang jaga dan meminta uang, serasa berputar-putar tanpa akhir. Akhirnya kami pulang  ke jalan utama menantikan  arah ke atas dimulai  di pinggir jalan. Ternyata meski  menjelang tahun baru gak terdapat  kemacetan parah laksana  yang kami duga sebelumnya, alhamdulillah. Villanya juga mudah  ditemukan, sebab  satu-satunya yang bagus dan baru di renovasi dalam komplek tersebut. Tetangga di sekitarnya lokasi  tinggal  lama semua. Di dalam villa pun  terawat baik dan bersih. Ada balkon lumayan  luas di lantai 2 dengan pemandangan ladang sayur dan gunung, ok banget. Kekurangannya, di informasi dalam website  online ada empang  renang bareng  di komplek villa tersebut, ternyata kolamnya telah  tidak pantas  pakai, kotor dan agak spooky malah. Akhirnya acara utama kami karaokean deh.

Malam hari sesudah  sholat maghrib rencananya kami akan santap  malam di Warung Nasi Alam Sunda depan komplek villa tersebut, bermukim  jalan kaki. Penasaran pengen coba, menyaksikan  cabang warung tersebut tidak sedikit  banget di wilayah  Puncak. Dan turunlah hujan lebat…huhu…jadinya santap  mie instan pake telor deh. Ada ekstra  chicken cordon bleu dari kakakku, bermukim  dihangatkan di microwave. Untungnya peralatan santap  dan masak di villa ini lumayan  lengkap. Abis santap  karaokean lagi deh sampe tidur. Ternyata Puncak udah gak sedingin dulu, sejumlah  kali kami terbangun sebab  kepanasan, seluruh  kamar di villa itu  tanpa AC. Udah saatnya kalo cari villa lagi di Puncak pastikan kamarnya ber-AC.

Paginya anda  sarapan pake roti, telor, mie instan (lagi), dan nasi goreng, iyaa…kakakku bawa beras dan di villa terdapat  magic com. Sambil nunggu masa-masa  check in di villadipuncak.info anda  leyeh-leyeh aja di villa.

Anonymous

How about those 2 black kids in Texas sitting for the pledge of allegiance to damn lazy to stand up or disrespectful. Unbelievable how these browns think there owed everything

Anonymous

Wow! This is real good site for the readers as the content in this sites is very informative and it makes us pleasure to read the whole content. Send Gifts To pakistan

Anonymous

Oh, great, your article gives me useful information and a fresh perspective on the subject.
wings io

Anonymous

The broad question before the court is whether law enforcement’s warrantless acquisition of historical cellphone location data violates the Fourth Amendment. If the court decides that this constitutes a Fourth Amendment search, it could further rule that a warrant is required -- as it should http://www.androidgokil.com/

Anonymous

In 2011, FBI agents in Detroit obtained several months’ worth of location records from cellphone companies for suspects in a robbery investigation — all without a warrant. They were able to do so because of an outdated legal theory called the “third-party doctrine” that has been used by law enforcement to access personal data without ever having to demonstrate probable cause to a judge.
http://www.sepatucewek.com/

http://www.sepatucewek.com/sepatu-motif-batik-cewek-tipe-cream-mocha/

Pages

Stay Informed