Return to front page | Return to News Archive
[Ben]:For thee, not for me Discuss This [2 comments so far] View Comments
Recently, the Ninth Circuit court of appeals decided that sneaking into your driveway, putting a GPS tracker on your vehicle and using it to track your car for extended period of time without a warrant is not an invasion of privacy. Their reasoning? Most folks don't put up gates across their driveway, so anyone can just walk up the driveway, thus there must be no expectation of privacy.

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski brought up the point that the justices could feel comfortable making that decision because they almost certainly could afford gates and fences to protect their own driveway.

So here is my idea. At some point these justices park in public places ... going to the gym, the grocery store, to their kids' baseball games, wherever. In short, places with even less expectation of privacy than your own driveway. Wouldn't it be fun if someone put a GPS tracking device on their vehicles when they were in a public place (thus with no expectation of privacy), left it on for a few weeks, retrieved it and then published the judge's driving habits?

I bet their opinions would change quickly when they realized their ruling could apply to them as well.
Permanent Link:
For thee, not for me Home
User ID:
Register here
166 users 8210 posts 0 active users
Contact Administrator
Contact Picture of the Day
Picture Archive
New images
Picture of the day
The LawDog Files
View From the Porch
Alex Mattingly
Smallest Minority
Individual Sponsors
Thrim LLC
©2024 by Ben Swenson.   All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
     Hosted by: