[Still Thinking]

Nice.

[Thane_Banquo]

A key basis for the ruling: The use of cell phones is "entirely voluntarily" and therefore individuals who use them have forfeited the right to constitutional protection for records showing where they have been used, the court held.

You've got to be kidding. By the same logic, use of a landline telephone is completely voluntary, and therefore the government can listen in on everyone's phone calls without a warrant.

[jiggyboy]

That’s as specious as the original argument in Smith vs. VA that we “voluntarily” “give up” the phone number of the person we’re calling, which somehow makes it public property.

[jwalsh07]

If you “voluntarily” write a letter or whisper sweet nothings to your wife this too is unprotected because you did it knowing that the NSA can reach out and touch you where and when they like. Welcome to Amerika.

[D-fendr]

Let’s see what this means:

The government doesn’t require me to write a letter...
The government doesn’t require me to make a phone call..
The government doesn’t require me to call my lawyer...
The government doesn’t require me to drive a car, take a plane, talk to my family, friends, business associates...

Looks like everything is free game except what the government requires, like my taxes. So anything with the IRS they can’t tap or track.

Oh, wait.

[DoughtyOne]

The use of cell phones is "entirely voluntarily" and therefore individuals who use them have forfeited the right to constitutional protection for records showing where they have been used, the court held.

Ah, isn't living within a home, the cornerstone of the fourth amendment also voluntary?  Talk about your fuzzy logic...


Ramirez's latest political cartoon LARGE VERSION 07/30/2013: LINK  LINK to regular sized version of Ramirez's latest, and an archive of his political cartoons.

FOLKS, THOSE OF YOU WHO CAN, PLEASE CLICK HERE AND PENCIL IN YOUR DONATION TO HELP END THIS FREEPATHON.  THANK YOU!
...this is a general all purpose message, and should not be seen as targeting any individual I am responding to...

[ElkGroveDan]

The use of cell phones is "entirely voluntarily" and therefore individuals who use them have forfeited the right to constitutional protection for records showing where they have been used, the court held.

That is the most idiotic conclusion possible in a privacy case. Carrying a purse or briefcase, is "entirely voluntary" and the government doesn't require you to use them, but it has already been established that the government may not invade the privacy of those items. A cell phone that you carry to facilitate the functions of your employment or private life is no different.

[taxcontrol]

Ruling is marginally correct, but the logic is seriously flawed.

Proper logic follows the fact that the cell phone records are property of the telephone company. It is the company’s private property, and if they WANT to give it away, they can. However, since it is private property, if they do NOT WANT to give the records away, a warrant is required.

[jeffc]

Just another example of the Judiciary re-interpreting the Constitution that it no longer believes in. One set of laws for us, nary a law or two for them.

Face it, we live in a lawless nation, ruled by the whim of government lords.

[tacticalogic]

Can the phone company then sell location information? If there’s no privacy concerns, then it should be able to provide that information to anyone.

[MeshugeMikey]

The NSA needs to work on the Promotional Image!

[KarlInOhio]

You've got to be kidding. By the same logic, use of a landline telephone is completely voluntary, and therefore the government can listen in on everyone's phone calls without a warrant.

Owning a landline is completely voluntary, and therefore the government can listen in on anything the microphone picks up whether a call is made or not. And how sure are you that the signal from the microphone can't be picked up over the line?

One place I visited regularly for work had phones with a button in the middle of the handset which physically disconnected the microphone if it wasn't pressed. About five minutes into a phone call your finger would cramp pretty bad.

[Texas Fossil]

Does this logic apply to ObamaCare? We do not choose anything associated with it, but they demand all our healthcare records?

Is that constitutional?

Of course not, unless you are Justice Roberts.

FUBO!

[Vendome]

A person’s use of a cell phone is voluntary?

Using a number owned by the subscriber.

Using a device owned by the subscriber.

Using a service that is a private organization, who interconnects to other private organizations, who connect a transmission to a local exchange, who in turn connect the call between two parties.

All the equipment and services are private individuals or entities.

There should be no breach of private communcations except pursuant to 4, 5 and 1 ammendments.

[Prospero]

I'm in the reluctant position of favoring the government's position, though not for reasons the "Justice" department would support, for the same reason that I hold in contempt federal laws banning private monitoring of certain radio frequencies, a ridiculous protection supporting the industry by Congress and its creature, the FCC.

Like television, all these devices are essentially radio transceivers and utilize the electro-magnetic spectrum, and then utilize my immediate environment, including my body, as a collateral conduit for, admittedly, "non-ionizing radiations." The right to filter, amplify and detect their transmissions is inalienable, just as it would be if two people on opposite sides of my house communicated with flashlights through my bedroom.

They can, of course, scramble, randomly jump frequencies, or make cryptic their transmissions, etc., but spurious radiations are fair game.

Wireless phones companies continuously sell the opposite, but there is a fundamental difference between hard-wired channels and radio.

The expectation of privacy when using a cell phone is an illusion.

The issue immediately branches off into more problematic questions, of course, about record keeping and the fundamental differences between a government's enumerated power and those of citizens talented enough to build and operate equipment capable of detecting, filtering and amplifying RF wavelengths.

And that is another story.

[CodeToad]

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. “

The courts are trying to revise what are our papers. At a minimum, electronic records are not the governments records, so they have no rights to them.

[American in Israel]

I have no words... Need to head over to the sports mans warehouse and get some more target rounds. Keep hoping I will find my stainless steel rifle I had the canoe accident with.

[zeugma]

IT is way past time our legislooters put a stop to this crap. The courts have taken the phrase "reasonable expectation of privacy" and twisted it to the point that the only place you actually have said privacy is if you are in your bathroom completely bereft of all electronic devices.

That they haven't made any effort tells us that they are more interested in expanding government power than protecting our rights.

[CSM]

“The use of cell phones is “entirely voluntarily” and therefore individuals who use them have forfeited the right to constitutional protection for records showing where they have been used, the court held.”

Saving money is entirely voluntary, so the gov’t can track my banking information. Using credit/debit cards are entirely voluntary, so the gov’t can track my spending. Watching TV is entirely voluntary, so the gov’t can track my viewing habits.

Every day I participate in thousands of entirely voluntary actions, therefore the government needs to implant a tracking chip to ensure that they can track my activities.

The founders are spinning and the sheeple are bleating away in ignorance.

[phockthis]

“entirely voluntarily”

Nice choice of words!!!

Did you realize that you “Voluntarily” wave your rights as well???

“The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government.”
City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944