The Supreme Court on GPS Tracking

Friday, January 27, 2012

Transcript

This week the Supreme Court decided a case called US v Jones about the constitutionality of warrantless GPS tracking. Bob talks to Orin Kerr, George Washington University law professor and blogger for The Volokh Conspiracy about what the Supreme Court's decision means for the future of GPS tracking by law enforcement.

Comments [2]

Lester M Paredes III from Los Angeles, CA

The fact that the lower court never considered the reasonableness of the search and whether the automobile exception to the warrant requirement was applicable makes United States v. Jones an interesting but relatively unimportant decision.

Imagine the same facts, same case, except the lower court did make a ruling as to whether the automobile exception applied. Then, the Court would have to either say that the "search" was of the person, or invent a new exception to the exception, i.e., a protection against GPS surveillance of a car.

Attorneyparedes.wordpress.com

Jan. 30 2012 04:44 PM
mogl from MA

Re. "they can install it, so long as they don't intend to use it" ...
It means manufacturer can install permanent trackers (like RFD tags) for the ostensible purpose of inventory tracking or customer service (like OnStar), but law enforcement can co-opt this for tracking purposes at anytime.

Jan. 29 2012 07:31 AM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.