Salon.com > fourth amendment

Obama’s wiretap America

Wed, 08 May 2013 17:29:00 +0000

Did the surveillance state just take another gigantic Big Brotherish step forward? The New York Times and Washington Post are reporting that the Obama administration is planning to support an FBI plan for "a sweeping overhaul of surveillance laws that would make it easier to wiretap people who communicate using the Internet rather than by traditional phone services."

Facebook posts, Skype calls, Google chats, Apple's iMessage -- under the new plan, every form of Internet communication would have to be accessible to law enforcement wiretapping. Civil libertarians, Internet companies and privacy activists are all understandably unenthused. A blogger at FireDogLake immediately labeled the news proof that Obama intended to support the "end of the 4th Amendment on the Internet."

High school smartphone do’s and dont’s

Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:30:00 +0000

In Albany, N.Y., the father of a 14-year-old teenager whose iPhone was confiscated after he was caught texting during class is fighting mad. Not because of the confiscation (I'm guessing most parents have no problem with teachers laying down the law against in-class phone use). But because of what the school principal did next. He searched the phone, discovered "inappropriate" pictures of the teenager's ex-girlfriend, and proceeded to call the Albany County Sheriff's Department.

My own 15-year-old son, who not too long ago had his iPod Touch confiscated for the day when it somehow "accidentally" started playing music during class, happened to be getting ready for school as I read the thoroughly reported Albany Times-Union story. I recounted the details to him.

"Isn't that just wrong?" he asked.

Well, that's the question, isn't it? And the answer appears to be in legal limbo-land. There doesn't seem to be a lot of case law on whether the Fourth Amendment protects smartphones against unreasonable search and seizure in high schools.

NYPD can temporarily continue unconstitutional stop-and-frisks

Wed, 23 Jan 2013 13:39:00 +0000

A federal judge has allowed the NYPD to continue its stop-and-frisk program in Bronx "Clean Halls" apartment buildings, despite having ruled the trespass searches unconstitutional earlier this month.

U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled Tuesday that suspicion-less stops in Bronx buildings in designated high crime areas can go on while the city appeals her decision. "The opinion acknowledges at the outset that many of the questions raised by stop-and-frisk are not easily answered and that it may be difficult to say where, precisely, to draw the line between constitutional and unconstitutional police encounters," read Sheindlin's decision.

Her ruling in early January had been celebrated by civil liberties groups like the NYCLU, who brought the suit against the police over searches carried out during sweeps of “Clean Halls” apartments. Operation Clean Halls, established in the 1991, gives police permission to stop and search individuals in and around New York apartment buildings in high crime areas. In 2011, according to the NYCLU , police stopped 1,137 of the 1,857 “Clean Halls” residents in the Bronx.

Stop-and-frisk program in Bronx ruled unconstitutional

Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:39:00 +0000

A federal judge Tuesday ruled that the NYPD had "systematically" acted unconstitutionally when carrying out stop-and-frisk searches on individuals leaving residential Bronx buildings.

According to the NYCLU who brought the class action suit against the NYPD, police had regularly carried out unlawful searches during sweeps of "Clean Halls" apartment buildings in the Bronx. Operation Clean Halls, established in the 1991, gives police permission to stop and search individuals in and around New York apartment buildings in high crime areas. In 2011, according to the NYCLU , police stopped 1,137 of the 1,857 "Clean Halls" residents in the Bronx.

Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled that the NYPD must immediately stop carrying out trespass stops outside the private buildings in the program, unless officers have reasonable suspicion, "a legal standard that requires officers to be acting on more than just a hunch," noted the New York Times.