Law enforcement has the task of protecting Americans from people that would commit violent crimes. They have to use technology that is up to date to track down those that have fled a crimes scene or have disappeared from the radar. But even with all of the tools at their disposal, there are still some actions that they cannot engage in because of the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.
One of the more controversial ways that people have tried to track down suspects is by using a cellphone dragnet. But a federal judge has finally ruled that to use the dragnet method was not only illegal but it is unconstitutional.
Judge M. Hannah Launch was the judge that ruled that law enforcement cannot use Google location to look for people that were near the scene of a crime back in 2019. Authorities wanted to look back at the location data and determine the people near the scene of the robbery. The method seems sound since the police are looking for suspects. But the fact is that privacy is a huge issue in America, and no agency can go around looking for people by using locators on their cell phones.
The method of detection seems to come right out of the movies. But the truth is that the technology is already out there that tracks a person’s movements throughout their day. That data is then stored away by the host. Some people are unaware that their movements are being monitored. But others know they must shut off their cell to keep from being tracked.
The issue of privacy seems to come up when the Democrats want to institute a spy system that gives the ability to track people that they would deem as a security risk to their existence. It is the same idea that the liberals wanted to try when trying to find people near the Capitol Building on the day of the January 6 protests. The Democrats went on a headhunt mission to try and find any person whose face ended up on the camera that day.
Launch determined that any person with their data gathered without cause had their Fourth Amendment violated. No agency can perform searches without first having probable cause. And they will need a warrant to search for information.
The liberals issued geofence warrants which they claimed gave them the right to look for people at the January 6 protests. But with this new ruling from the judge, Google is back peddling and looking at whether or not they can comply with such request.
Google is one of those tech giants that seem to always be under attack. They stated that “We vigorously protect the privacy of our users, including by pushing back on overly broad requests, while supporting the important work of law enforcement.”
The Democrats would love the ability to track every Republican in the country in real-time. They would have locations on people they see as domestic terrorists. And they could move in on a person that is outspoken and presents ideas contrary to the established belief system.
The liberals desire to have a form of government where they are in charge and can actively monitor people. They can hunt them down and make them disappear. They would essentially be able to do what the Chinese do to people branded as enemies of the state.
Luck’s decision is being seen as a foundational decision. Albert Fox Cahn is the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project. He stated that “This is going to be a wake-up call for the judges who have been rubber-stamping these sorts of warrants at the federal and state level.”
Law enforcement has an important job to perform every single day. They must look for clues and suspects when working on a case. But they must be careful to use methods that do not violate the right to privacy. The police involved in such matters claim to be careful to use only anonymous data from Google that can be used to locate people. They also state that such information is not enough to incriminate a person or even charge them with a crime. It is a method to help them find people at the scene of the crime.