
New Federal Court Rulings Find Geofence Warrants Unconstitutional - glitcher
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/08/new-federal-court-rulings-find-geofence-warrants-unconstitutional-0
======
staplers
As a resident of Portland, I see police and federal agents disregard judge
orders And break laws every single night.

Law and order is a myth that is pushed by those seemingly "above" it.

~~~
ed25519FUUU
It’s weird to be because I see virtually all sides in Portland saying this
exact same thing. Can they all be right?

~~~
andybak
It's not a logical contradiction for both sides to be right.

And it might even be factually correct from both sides given a reasonable
interpretation of "fact".

What will remain is your evaluation about which type of law breaking is more
dangerous to the fabric of society. And that seems to be the fault line
between left and right.

Personally I think government and cops breaking the law is corrosive in a
unique way. This is a fairly broadly accepted view as well - it's why crimes
by law enforcement and the judiciary have often been treated more harshly.
It's a huge red flag when they are treated more leniently as it speaks of
corruption that runs deep in the body politic.

~~~
shkkmo
> it's why crimes by law enforcement and the judiciary have often been treated
> more harshly

That is not my understanding. I think if you look at the numbers you will see
lower prosecution rates and lighter sentences for crimes committed by police.

~~~
andybak
Yeah. Depends when and where we're discussing. I'm not from the US.

But you're broadly right. I should have said "theoretically" instead of
"often"

------
LatteLazy
Those are very wide search requests. There is no reason to think that more
specific geofence requests would also be thrown out is there?

There is another question here too: with more complex analysis like this, what
is a good definition of a geofence? A 45min window around a busy intersection
might catch a few 1000 people. But would the same geofence be OK if it was
combines: who from intersection A in window1 was also at intersection B in
window2? Presumably that would be OK if the number of people caught was lower
compared to the number of criminals sought, and it would be much lower.

Finally, people should note that that data legally belongs to the company not
the user. If Google agreed to cooperate (as mobile phone companies do) it
would be entirely legal for all the data (and more) to be turned over and
used, no questions asked.

~~~
baybal2
Why somebody even cares about that when PRISM is still up, and running?

~~~
LatteLazy
Agreed. Until that is sorted, all this is just a weird little dance we do to
distract from the fact the room is on fire...

------
Chromozon
How is this any different than having the police go from business to business
asking for security camera footage, analyzing the footage over a time period,
connecting faces to names, and then going out and questioning those people?
Both seem to be ways of tracking who is in an area at a given time, but
geofencing is a significantly more efficient method.

~~~
glitcher
I would argue that the geofencing method collects a far greater number of
people in the initial sweep, and has way more potential for misuse or straight
out abuse. IMO, there are too many examples of law enforcement abusing their
power, even lying and fabricating evidence, for the sake of arresting
_somebody_ , so they can close a case? I don't think they can be trusted with
sweeping technologies like arbitrary geofence warrants or even (flawed) facial
recognition.

I think in certain extreme cases I would be ok with geofence warrants, but as
the article mentions they are being used with increasing regularity.

------
RandoHolmes
This seems so obviously unconstitutional to me that I can't believe it was
even tried.

~~~
adrr
Law enforcement will always do unconstitutional actions until a court cracks
down on it. They used to attach tracking devices to cars without a warrant.
There’s no punishment to push limits and defendants lack the resources to
challenge the constitutionality of the action. Holding police chief
financially liable would probably change police behavior. Right now defendants
can only sue the city/police department and the tax payers foot the bill.
Unconstitutional actions piercing qualified immunity seems like reasonable
balance.

~~~
RandoHolmes
> Unconstitutional actions piercing qualified immunity seems like reasonable
> balance.

I definitely agree with that.

------
joncrane
Neat article. EFF's favicon looks so similar to ESPN's that I thought I had
opened an ESPN tab at first.

------
kevin_thibedeau
This is useful for tracking down spree criminals. A single IMSI at multiple
crime scenes is a pretty good signal worth investigating.

~~~
colejohnson66
Then get a warrant for that IMEI. The court ruled that the search warrant was
too broad.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
If you already have a suspect there is no need to hunt for them.

~~~
shkkmo
And if we put everyone in jail preemptively, there is no need to prosecute
them.

I think you have figured out how to fix the criminal justice system!

