The Fourth Amendment

Source: "The Government's New Right To Track Your Every Move With GPS" TIME magazine, Adam Cohen. August 26, 2010
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599201315000




Constitutional Connection:


            The Fourth Amendment states " 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."





Analysis of the Connection:


            One of our founding fathers John Locke believed in natural/ inalienable rights. Under these rights are the right to life, liberty, and property. The fourth amendment grants the rights that people shall be secured in their homes, persons, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seziures. There has been some debate on which this should be used in all situations or just as it is proposed legally.


            There is a new right that government has to violate privacy. Government can in fact sneak onto any civilians property and attach a GPS tracking device onto your vehicle and track you where ever you go. Currently in California and eight other western states this rule is into play. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit who defends this jursdiction, recently decided that the government can monitor citizens this way anyway it wants with no needs of a search warrant. The fourth amendment ckearly states that people have right to be secure in their houses, persons, papers, and effects and that no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation particuarly describing the place to be searched, and any persons or things to be seized.


                  In one case the DEA, (Drug Enforcement Administration), decided to monitor Juan Pineda-Moreno, a man who resides in Oregon who they had suspected was growing marijuana. In the middle if the night they snuck onto his property, found his jeep in his drive way a few feet away form his trailer home and attached a GPS to the bottom of his car. Pineda-Moreno then challenged the DEA's actions in front of a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit that was ruled in January said it was perfectly legal. This month a larger group on the panel who were subsequently asked to reconsider the ruling decided this month to let it stand. 


               The government violated  Pineda-Moreno in a couple of different ways. One was the invasion of his driveway which the court has long held that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their homes and in the "curtilage," a fancy legal term for the area around the home. The government's invasion on property just a few feet away was clearly in this area of privacy. The judges say that this area was not private because it is open to strangers such as ddelivery people and m=neighborhood children who can wander across it uninvitedly.
           
               A big arguement is that the only peoples property that is absolutely private are rich peoples' because they are usually fenced inside a community, have electric gates and are protected with security booths. Therefore, people who cannot afford such barriers around their property have to put up with the government sneaking around it. Another rule is that once a GPS device is put unto the property the government is free to track the person without a warrant. Fortunately, other courts are coming to a different conclusion from the Ninth Circuit's which  includes the influential U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. That court ruled this month, that tracking for an extended period of time with GPS is an invasion of privacy that requires a warrant. The issue is likely to end up in the Supreme Court.