Surveillance state

A WIsconsin appeals court has issued a decision (HTML, PDF) that it is acceptable for the police to surreptitiously plant GPS tracking devices onto the cars of suspects without getting warrants, because doing so is not a search or seizure.  Apparently the court doesn’t think that doing so violates anyone’s constitutionally protected rights.

That being the case, presumably they wouldn’t have any problem with citizens surreptitiously planting GPS tracking devices onto police cars.  WIth suitable distribution of the tracking information via the internet to mobile devices (e.g., smart phones), that could be quite useful for people that want to avoid speed traps, etc.

The appeals court did write that “We are also concerned about the private use of GPS surveillance devices. [...] Consequently, we urge the legislature to explore imposing limitations on the use of GPS and similar devices by both government and private actors.“  I think the outcome of that is predicable.  The legislature will impose substantial limitations on the use of GPS trackers by private actors, and minimal or no limitations on their use by the government.

A New York appeals court just reached the opposite decision (PDF), that the police should not plant GPS tracking devices without a warrant, citing Supreme Court Justice Brandeis’ dissenting opinion in Olmstead v. United States:

“The protection guaranteed by the Amendments [the Fourth and Fifth] is much broader in scope [than the protection of property]. The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man’s spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone — the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. To protect that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the Government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment. And the use, as evidence in a criminal proceeding, of facts ascertained by such intrusion must be deemed a violation of the Fifth.”