Supreme Court Rules Against GPS Tracking

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

On Monday the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that police violated the 4th amendment when they placed a Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking device on a suspect’s car and monitored its movements for 28 days. In his opinion on the case, Justice Anthony Scalia wrote that the use of GPS constituted a "search" and therefore requires a warrant. This ruling may have an impact on other cases where GPS was used, as well as other types of surveillance mechanisms.

Jeffrey Rosen is a professor of law at George Washington University.  Attorney Marc Rotenberg is director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, or EPIC.


Jeffrey Rosen and Marc Rotenberg

Produced by:

Shia Levitt

Comments [1]

BillV from Boston

The warrant element of this story is under-noted in the show. I get the feeling that I'm getting the People Magazine version of this story. It's kinda right but just doesn't get the whole story. The mention of what this means in a digital world is plain wrong when you include the fact that the case just says the police have to get a warrant. They can still track you. They just have to play by the existing rules.

Jan. 24 2012 09:41 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.