<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] Judge Samuel Alito's police-friendly views of electronic surveillance [priv]





Begin forwarded message:

From: Declan McCullagh <declan@xxxxxxxx>
Date: November 1, 2005 9:55:39 PM EST
To: politech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Politech] Judge Samuel Alito's police-friendly views of electronic surveillance [priv]


http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5927003.html

Nominee's past rulings give hint of tech views
November 1, 2005, 4:58 PM PST

...snip...

In a case decided last year, Alito ruled that the FBI did not need a warrant to outfit the hotel suite of a boxing official with a hidden audio recorder and remotely controlled video camera that could swivel 360 degrees. The devices were activated when a police informant was also present in the room of the official, who was suspected of taking bribes.

Alito's fellow judge Theodore McKee, a Clinton appointee, dissented on the grounds that advances in surveillance technology would eviscerate the privacy principles found in the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of "unreasonable searches."

"Given the evolving sophistication of technology, it is increasingly imperative that the fundamental liberties guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment not be eroded by the warrantless use of devices that allow the government to see through curtains, walls and doors," McKee wrote. "To the extent the Fourth Amendment has any vitality in an era of increasingly sophisticated electronic eavesdropping, it surely protects the privacy of someone in the intimacy of a hotel suite from the potential of warrantless 24-hour video surveillance."

...snip...

In another case decided in 2002 by the 3rd Circuit Court, police in Pennsylvania acted on a six-month-old tip that a high school teacher was viewing illegal adult pornography on the Internet. They obtained a search warrant for the teacher's home and found child pornography on his computer's hard drive.

In an opinion written by Judge Maryanne Barry, another Clinton appointee, the 2-1 majority said the search warrant was invalid because the tip was "stale" and based on a dubious source. Also, they said, police had no probable cause to look for any kind of pornography, and investigators should not go on a fishing expedition through a suspect's hard drive just to find some sort of incriminating files.

Alito dissented. "The previously-noted incidents alleged in the affidavit showed that the defendant had a sexual interest in minors and that he had used sexual materials on several occasions as part of his course of conduct," he wrote. "All of this information tends to support a finding of probable cause."

...snip...
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/