The Clinton Herald, Clinton, Iowa

Top News

April 30, 2014

Your phone may not have the right to remain silent

WASHINGTON — Big Brother would have loved your smartphone. It not only knows where you've been and who's in touch with you but also records your photos, texts, e-mails and social media exchanges. Linked to the cloud, it allows access to your entire digital lifespan, including financial and medical records.

But can the police search your smartphone -- that is, when they arrest you for, say, driving without a seat belt? There may not be a more important privacy question in our lifetimes, and Tuesday the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument on it.

The constitutional background here is pretty straightforward. The Fourth Amendment protects not only your person, but also your "papers and effects" against warrantless search. If you're arrested, there's an exception: The police can search for weapons within reach, and they can search for and seize any evidence on you "in order to prevent its concealment or destruction," according to a 1969 precedent. Under truly urgent circumstances - say, a ticking time bomb - police can ignore the warrant standards altogether.

Once the government has the evidence, it can look at any aspect of it, and also keep a copy. That tradition may well have made sense from 1789 until the invention of the smartphone. But given the tremendous quantity and quality of information we now carry with us, the Constitution will have to evolve.

The modern problem isn't just the profound invasion of privacy that's possible through a smartphone search. Much worse, under the old rules, the government could store all the data - including the stuff in the cloud - in an eternal government archive. Orwell might be surprised he never thought of it. (No carping from those of you who note that the National Security Agency already has more or less the same data. This archive would be different; it would be searchable by police.)

The good news from Tuesday's oral argument is that the justices seemed to realize our brave new world requires new rules. Even the arch-originalist Antonin Scalia commented that if someone is arrested for not wearing a seat belt "it seems absurd that you should be able to search that person's iPhone."

The bad news is that there is no guarantee the court will do the logical thing and insist that a warrant ordinarily be required for searching a smartphone that has been seized incident to arrest. The court's conservatives seemed very interested in the rule proposed by the office of the solicitor general, which is that the police should be able to search a smartphone without a warrant in order to find evidence relevant to the crime for which a person is being arrested.

On the surface, the proposed rule has some mild appeal. It certainly responds to Justice Scalia's concern that every arrestee for any crime, no matter how small, could find his or her entire life's data reviewed and logged into a single government archive. The trick would be figuring out how to limit a data search to information related to the cause of arrest.

 In the test case the court heard, the defendant was an alleged gang member, so the searches could logically include his e-mails, texts and photos, not to mention his bank account. His tattoos were part of the reason he was suspected of belonging to a gang, so records of visiting the tattoo parlor might have logically been included. Come to think of it, why not his medical records, in case he'd had a tattoo surgically removed? As Justice Elena Kagan put it, "It sounds good as a limiting principle, but it ends up you can imagine in every case that the police could really look at everything."

As usual in close cases, the final disposition may come down to Justice Anthony Kennedy. Early in the arguments, Kennedy seemed interested in limiting the search possibility to serious crimes. This would help, but would not be anything close to enough; after all, the crime whose seriousness would be measured would not be one for which a person was convicted, but one of which he was merely suspected.

The arguments featured a final technological twist: One of the classic exceptions to the warrant requirement is to preserve evidence from destruction. Smartphones are distinctly susceptible to this risk insofar as most now include a feature that enables the owner to remotely wipe the phone of all data. Designed so that losing your phone doesn't mean losing your life, this feature could become your best friend if and when you're arrested.

During oral argument, the justices struggled over whether the danger of a wiped phone gave the police extra reason to search immediately. They speculated somewhat wildly about so-called "Faraday bags" and even "Faraday rooms," in which a phone could be turned on without receiving a cell signal and commanded to wipe data. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, cementing her new role as the court's techie, asked why police couldn't just put the phone in airplane mode and avoid the whole wiping problem.

In the end, the true privacy answer may lie in technology rather than constitutional law. I think I'll go out and get a phone that unlocks only to my fingerprint - and that automatically wipes if anyone else tries to open it. That won't save me if the cops make me open it - remember the eyeball in "Blade Runner" - but I think in this case I won't count on the justices. I'll rely on the engineers.

         

1
Text Only
Top News
  • Arizona's prolonged lethal injection is fourth in U.S. this year

    Arizona's execution of double-murderer Joseph Wood marked the fourth time this year that a state failed to dispatch a convict efficiently, according to the Constitution Project, a bipartisan legal group.3

    July 24, 2014

  • Technology plays key part in battling police brutality (with VIDEO)

    Allegations of police brutality are nothing new -- as long as there has been law enforcement, citizens have registered claims that some officers cross the line. But in the last few years, the claims of excessive force are being corroborated with new technology from cell phone cameras, police dash-cams and surveillance videos. 

    July 24, 2014

  • Lindley, Tom.jpg Better police needed for college teams enticed to cheat

    The NCAA once cracked down on colleges that went too far luring top prospects, then it targeted teams that lathered players with special treatment. That was until the NCAA's get-tough approach backfired, rendering it ineffective and creating an opportunity for those who want to play dirty.

    July 24, 2014 1 Photo

  • Clinton Community School District 2013-2014 Wages

    Clinton Community School District 2013-2014 Wages

    July 24, 2014

  • techel.jpg Iowa man convicted of killing pregnant wife

    A jury convicted an Iowa man Thursday of killing his pregnant wife in 2012, rejecting his claims of innocence after the third trial in the case.

    July 24, 2014 1 Photo

  • RAGBRAI rider from Sioux City dies in Mason City

    A RAGBRAI participant from Sioux City has been found dead in his tent in Mason City in the second death during the weeklong bicycling event.

    July 24, 2014

  • Facebook continues moneymaking trend

    Facebook seems to have figured out - for now at least - the holy grail for all media right now: how to make money selling mobile ads.

    July 24, 2014

  • Deliberations resume at Iowa man's murder trial

    Jurors will be allowed to review the video, but not the transcript, of an Iowa man being interrogated as they consider whether he's guilty of murder in the death of his pregnant wife.

    July 24, 2014

  • Has the iPad lost its swag?

    The company reported this week that sales of its sleek, pricey tablet were down 19 percent from last quarter and 9 percent year-over-year.

    CEO Tim Cook tried to reassure investors that Apple's new partnership with IBM to sell its devices to IBM's corporate customers will help make iPads ubiquitous in the workplace.

    July 24, 2014

  • Health insurers owe Iowans nearly $1.8M in refunds

    The federal government says insurers owe Iowans nearly $1.8 million in refunds because of a provision in the Affordable Care Act.

    July 24, 2014

AP Video