Attached is an article briefing the initial reaction by the Supreme Court on whether the use of GPS for surveillance purposes requires a warrant. I thought most interesting Justice Alito's following concerns: "Before the computer and internet age, much of the privacy that people enjoyed was not the result of legal or constitutional protections... but the result of the difficulty of traveling and gathering information." Does this mean the Justices might start recognizing constitutional protections in other contexts, not necessarily criminal?

-- AlejandroMercado - 10 Nov 2011

• Law_Technology_News:_Citing_Orwell_Supreme_Court_Appears_Wary_of_Police_GPS_Surveillance.pdf: Law_Technology_News:_Citing_Orwell_Supreme_Court_Appears_Wary_of_Police_GPS_Surveillance.pdf