We have previously discussed the case of the GPS tracking of a suspected drug dealer's car here and here.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in United States v. Jones. At SCOTUSblog, Tom Goldstein explains the ruling this way:
Los Angeles Times
Above the Law
The Atlantic
ABA Journal
Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in United States v. Jones. At SCOTUSblog, Tom Goldstein explains the ruling this way:
I think that the correct way to understand the case is to read it as having two separate majority opinions.More news and commentary:
...
Here is the upshot. Five Justices join the holding of the “majority” opinion (per Scalia) that by attaching and monitoring a GPS device the police conduct a “search”; four Justices (those in the Alito concurrence) reject that view. Five Justices join or express their agreement with the portion of the “Alito” opinion concluding that the long-term monitoring of a GPS device violates a reasonable expectation of privacy; four Justices (those in the majority, minus Sotomayor) leave that question open.
Los Angeles Times
Above the Law
The Atlantic
ABA Journal