General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSmith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) - No warrant required for call metadata
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._MarylandSmith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979),[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the installation and use of the pen register was not a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and hence no warrant was required. The pen register was installed on telephone company property at the telephone company's central offices. In the Majority opinion, Justice Blackmun rejected the idea that the installation and use of a pen registry constitutes a violation of the "legitimate expectation of privacy" since the numbers would be available to and recorded by the phone company anyway.
Background
In Katz v. United States (1967), the United States Supreme Court established its "reasonable expectation of privacy" test. It overturned Olmstead v. United States and held that wiretaps were unconstitutional searches, because there was a reasonable expectation that the communication would be private. The government was then required to get a warrant to execute a wiretap.
In Smith v. Maryland, the Supreme Court held that a pen register is not a search because the "petitioner voluntarily conveyed numerical information to the telephone company." Since the defendant had disclosed the dialed numbers to the telephone company so they could connect his call, he did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the numbers he dialed. The court did not distinguish between disclosing the numbers to a human operator or just the automatic equipment used by the telephone company.
derby378
(30,252 posts)The trend in Constitutional law needs to be towards more privacy and freedom, not less.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)Most likely Brennan would have sided with the minority. Not so sure about Powell.
I agree with those who say the Court probably would have ruled differently on a sweeping database that captures the meta-data of all calls coming in and out of the United States. That's very different from a pin register on one call center in one state where the police were trying to capture info. on one, identified suspect. Ultimately, we need guidance from our current SCOTUS on this issue. Sadly, there's no appeal process available from FISA Court rulings, afaik, so the SCOTUS has not had a chance to chime in (and they're probably avoiding this issue because it is a hot potato).
-Laelth
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)veveto
(11 posts)Today's issue involves bulk collection of metadata, against millions not suspected of anything.