By the time that this newspaper goes to print on Wednesday, the Supreme Court will have made a decision about whether or not law enforcement officers may search the mobile phone of a person that they were placing under arrest.
The Supreme Court will make the decision about the fourth amendment off the basis of two court cases. The first relates to a man in Massachusetts, who was arrested for dealing drugs. After the authorities went through his phone, they found a number that he called and tracked down the address. At this address, the police found more illegal substances and a firearm.
The second case involves a Californian man who was pulled over for driving with an expired license. The police then found guns in his car and searched his smart phone. Using the evidence found on his phone, prosecutors were able to convict him of attempted murder.
Both of these cases relate to the fourth amendment, which prevents the unreasonable search and seizure of a person’s property. Under this amendment, police are required to have probable cause and obtain a warrant from a judge to search a person’s property. The only property that the police are allowed to search in the event of an arrest is the arrestee themselves and the immediate area within arms reach of the arrestee, if they are unsecured.
The fourth amendment was critical to those who created the amendments to protect the rights of United States citizens. The foundation of this country was based off of preventing the civil rights abuses inflicted upon early Americans by the British. The purpose of the amendment was to prevent the government from being able to pry too deeply in the private lives of citizens. The continuation of this search policy will be exactly what the framers of the constitution feared.
The cell phone appears to be included as on the person rather than other personal property that requires a warrant to search. The two appeals on this case will determine whether or not this practice will continue to be acceptable. A mobile phone is currently treated more like a wallet or a purse than the personal, miniature computer that it is.
This should not be the case. This Supreme Court decision is critical to preventing a downwards slide towards a lack of digital privacy. A mobile phone is a view into a person’s entire life. From it, authorities can find out more than from a wallet. At this point, most cell phones have more personal information on them than some computers do.
Technological advancements have thrown lawmakers for a loop. Every day, laws are becoming further and further away from being applicable.
Think about the information that one holds on his or her phone. Addresses, credit card information, insurance, their latest phone log, etc. None of this was available to the average police officer or authority figure without a warrant. But now with the tap of a screen or the click of a button, all of this information may be obtainable by a simple body search.
We must equate one’s phone lock with the lock on their home. There is a reason the lock is there and it should be respected in the same manner. Only those who own the key, or key code, can unlock it. Whether its a home, or a phone.