Searching without Warrants: Cell Phones

[Haley Smith]

As an American citizen and particularly as a Texan, one has certain rights. One of these  rights is privacy. What this looks like, though, is constantly changing as technology increases and people store increasingly private information from social security numbers and even various cards on their phones. It is important for the government to implement laws that protect people's privacy, thus a recent court case addressed searching someone without a warrant and how this applied to their cell phones.

This article talks about how recently the supreme court has been divided on the idea of whether law enforcement should obtain a warrant before searching someone's cell phone. This case presents a complex mix of issues to be explored. Should all pieces of technology receive legal protection? How is a cell phone different from one's wallet or purse? As well as should possibly embarrassing digital evidence be offered unfettered to law enforcement? The court is worried that giving too much power of discretion to the law enforcement officers will challenge American's privacy forever. However, there have been countless cases where cell phone evidence has assisted in getting a criminal off the streets. This raises the question, which is better, security or privacy?

I chose this article because it is a relevant issue that could greatly affect the future of privacy and law enforcement. I am currently training to be a law enforcement officer with Plano and the use of cell phone evidence is important in a lot of cases to gain information, from their true home address, to whether or not they know someone, to where they were. Thus, I personally realize the significance of this ruling.

Although I definitely see the side of not allowing search of a cellphone without a warrant on erring on the side of privacy, in my opinion public safety and security takes precedence over privacy. In certain cases, if the phone was only admitted to evidence to be later searched with a warrant, and not immediately searched, evidence could remain unfound that could potentially imprison a dangerous criminal. Although the Bible never talks specifically about law enforcement or issues such as search warrants, I think that faith informs a more high-security approach. Everything someone does should be honorable and thus privacy where one's cell phone is concerned should not be a problem if the person is maintaining a high level of integrity through their cell phone use. Thus, I would argue that even if privacy is slightly compromised by allowing law enforcement to search a cell phone without a warrant, in the end it would be to the advantage of everyone as there would be a higher level of security.

An important issue that local, state and national governments have to deal with is how to adapt to the ever-progressing age of technology and how to best maintain people's rights. The issue of whether cell phones should be allowed to be searched without a warrant is one that is currently being addressed by the supreme court. I would argue that it is in the best interest of the country to allow searches without warrants, thus promoting the security of the country.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/29/us/supreme-court-cell-phones/index.html

[Megan Chambers]

Haley, I agree with your view on this issue, but it is definitely a tricky subject. While I think safety over privacy is important, I also do not want the government to become too involved in my personal life. Texas is a state that supports small government involvement, and I personally hold to that viewpoint. But in this situation I would have to side with you.

This greatly affects my personal life. If someone committed a crime against me, I would want law enforcement to look through the criminal's cell phone as soon as they found it. Where crime is concerned, the faster evidence is revealed the better. Therefore, searching cell phones is the right thing to do even without a warrant if a serious crime has been committed.

I would address this problem by supporting the side that favors searching without a warrant. My faith tells me that men don't always know what is best. Sometimes good intentions don't mean that something is in fact good. So, I am choosing to believe that it's better to act quickly in order to solve something, rather than to be complacent because someone thinks it's a good idea to protect privacy in serious criminal cases.

[Emily Austin]

Haley,

I think you nailed it when you stated, "An important issue that state, local and national government have to deal with is how to adapt to ever progressing age of technology." This is such a huge issue concerning MANY areas of life in general. The fact is: privacy vs. security. We have all heard the expressions of "the government knows everything" or other forms of that, and while that is scary, it is probably a lot more accurate that we would like to think. With that said, whatever is in a cell phone of a suspect WILL eventually be found, its just a matter of time. Like you said, time is the most important thing. 

As an American I believe the government should not be allowed to invade your personal privacy, but at the same time, once you violate your role as an American- I have no problem with the government stepping in to do whatever it takes to sentence you. If that information is found in your cell phone, so be it. 

[Madison Hoover]

I agree. It is interesting because cell phones really aren't different from wallets or purses. Privacy is only privacy until something dangerous happens. How willing are people to let their stuff be looked at if it's for a good cause? I think that the government can only regulate so much. I also think safety and precautions take pick over privacy.

[Molly]

I definitely agree with your take on this issue. I understand the controversy taking place however I think that public safety and proper punishment for crimes take precedence over privacy. Personally, this would affect my life if a person ever committed a criminal act against me. I would feel much safer if I knew the police could quickly acquire a larger amount of information and possibly convicting evidence against the person. I definitely think a warrant would make things take longer, could give criminals a chance to dispose of evidence against them, etc. Therefore, restrictions against searching and seizing should not apply to cell phones. If I was passionate about this issue, I would address this problem by offering my support. If someone has nothing to hide, like no compromising evidence, then they should have no problem with their phone being searched. 

[3age7zth9y15s]

In my opinion, it does not matter to me whether they search my cell phone because I have nothing to hide. At the same time, I understand the reasoning behind the authorities wanting to have the right to search stranger's cellular devices because it may be hiding some incriminating evidence about a murder that had just happened. I agree with this author that from a Christian perspective, I should not have to worry about any questionable information being found on my cell phone, because I am to have integrity and honor God with everything that I do. 

[David Brandon]

When I think of this I think of the locked door principle and how this may apply. Take for example someones home, they keep valuables in there, things of privacy, in some cases there is evidence in homes that may be incriminating to some people. Now not the side of police, if they have reasonable cause they can make entry into the house, this more often than not is reserved for emergencies, take for example someones life may be in danger.  In special scenarios if the door is not locked, meaning if they can make entry by one move of the door handle, the status quo begins to change. If they door is locked, maybe the dead bolt is used, there is no getting in for them without a warrant. Now for the case of cell phones, a place where we keep valuable, private stuff, the same principle on it applies, I think if its locked, there should be no entry without a warrant. Should the phone be unlocked, I think this case could warrant a whole other procedural list for law enforcement to gain access to phone for the information on it.