FBI Turns Off Thousands of GPS Devices After Supreme Court Ruling
-
-
By Julia Angwin
Original source: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/02/25/fbi-turns-off-thousands-of-gps-devices-after-supreme-court-ruling/
The Supreme Court’s recent ruling overturning the warrantless use of GPS tracking devices has caused a “sea change” inside the U.S. Justice Department, according to FBI General Counsel Andrew Weissmann.
Mr. Weissmann, speaking at a University of San Francisco conference called “Big Brother in the 21st Century” on Friday, said that the court ruling prompted the FBI to turn off about 3,000 GPS tracking devices that were in use.
These devices were often stuck underneath cars to track the movements of the car owners. In U.S. v. Jones, the Supreme Court ruled that using a device to track a car owner without a search warrant violated the law.
After the ruling, the FBI had a problem collecting the devices that it had turned off, Mr. Weissmann said. In some cases, he said, the FBI sought court orders to obtain permission to turn the devices on briefly – only in order to locate and retrieve them.
Mr. Weissmann said that the FBI is now working to develop new guidelines for the use of GPS devices. He said the agency is also working on guidelines to cover the broader implications of the court decision beyond GPS devices.
Please read entire article at source link –
-
Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!
February 29th, 2012 at 1:56 pm
Federalist Papers #83:
-Begin excerpt-
The rules of legal interpretation are rules of common sense, adopted by the courts in the construction of the laws.
-End excerpt
Federalist Papers #78:
-Begin excerpt
The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.
Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws, rather than by those which are not fundamental.
-End excerpt-
Learn basic logic, public servants. It’s not that hard to know when you’re being given an unconstitutional order.
US Constitution, Fourth Amendment:
-Begin excerpt-
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.
-End excerpt-
See also:
How stare decisis Subverts the Law
http://constitution.org/col/0610staredrift.htm
February 29th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Never fear, big brother already has a back-up plan. Start using some of the 30,000 drones that the crooks in congress has just allowed to be flown over the USA!
March 7th, 2012 at 8:46 pm
Well, this calls for another march dern it!