The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[Betty]

That just doesn't make sense. If I have a computer in the car, what about that? Does it matter if it's a desktop vs laptop vs tablet? Aren't a smart phone and tablet like an ipad similar enough?

[alphabassettgrrl]

Wow.

Commenters have said the phone should simply have been inventoried as a phone, and there I absolutely agree. Nothing on the phone could have been a danger to the officers. No reason to look at it.

Maybe if someone's pulled over for reckless or unsafe driving they could ask to look at the log, to see if you were talking or texting in the last few minutes, but other than that, I can't see any reason they would need to see the contents of a phone.

[Alex]

It could be accurate as told but experience says that a story from The Blaze should be investigated to make sure reality conforms.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Alex

It could be accurate as told but experience says that a story from The Blaze should be investigated to make sure reality conforms.

In this case the Blaze article was linked to from Drudgereport.com so that should elevate any concerns about its veracity.

[Alex]

It could be accurate as told but experience says that a story from The Blaze should be investigated to make sure reality conforms.

[Ghoulish Delight]

In this case the Blaze article was linked to from Drudgereport.com so that should elevate any concerns about its veracity.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

In this case the Blaze article was linked to from Drudgereport.com so that should alleviate any concerns about its veracity.

There, I fixed that embarrassing typo for you.

[Strangler Lewis]

The decision is unremarkable.

Which is not to say it's not outrageous.

But under current precedent, it's unremarkable.

Someday, "they" will develop a machine to hook up to people's brains to accurately record their thoughts and their intent (sale or personal use) regarding the drugs and other indicia in their car. Doing so would seem to be as lawful under the Fourth Amendment as searching a cell phone, and it would be as lawful under the Fifth Amendment as a forced blood draw.

The interesting Fourth Amendment issue would be when evidence of other crimes is uncovered in the suspect's thoughts. Arguably, the search would be overbroad if the technology could not hone in on the specific memory centers that referenced the crime being investigated. On the other hand, the police generally have the right to seize evidence in plain view anywhere they have a right to be, i.e., your brain.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Did a tiny bit of digging. The decision was in January.

One other thing I found in the search was that police in Michigan don't just look at your phone- they download the whole database from it.

[Alex]

Wasn't there another recent ruling somewhere that causing a computer to wake up, even if in the course of siezing it, was a search requiring a warrant?