Civil Liberties Assignment “Civil liberties concern basic rights and freedomes that are guaranteed – either explicity identified in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, or interpreted through the years by courts and lawmakers.” It includes freedome of speech or the rights to be secure agaisnt unreasonable searches and seizures, which is also written in the Fourth Amendment, and more. The Fourth Amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
…show more content…
He then placed a GPS tracking under Jones’ Jeep, which he was a designated driver for it, to track his movements for twenty-eight days. Jones was later convicted and sentenced to life in prison. On the other hand, controversy started the raise. The people were debating whether the placement of a tracking device on a person’s car a “search” under the Fourth Amendment. The case was brought up to the Court, called United States v. Jones. The judges ruled nine-to-zero, stating the act violated the Fourth Amendment. The opinion was delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia. He said that even though the Government obtained the needed warrant from the United States District Court, the GPS installation was restricted to ten days and within the Columbia district only. Nonetheless, the GPS was there for twenty-eight days and it tracked the Jeep in Maryland too. Furthermore, The Court rejected the government’s argument that “there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a person’s movement on public thoroughfares and emphasized that the Fourth Amendment provided some protection for trespass onto personal property.” In addition, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a concurring opinion. Justice Samuel Alito also wrote a concurring and later joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan. If I were on the court, I would rule the same. The Government argued that it was a reasonable search, therefore it is lawful under the Fourth Amendment. However, they did not address it and support it. Therefore, I think the judges made a right decision to forfeit it. Furthermore, the Government clearly went over their limit by exceed the days and location that they were permitted to place the GPS device. Overall, I strongly agree with the judges’ decision and
He then placed a GPS tracking under Jones’ Jeep, which he was a designated driver for it, to track his movements for twenty-eight days. Jones was later convicted and sentenced to life in prison. On the other hand, controversy started the raise. The people were debating whether the placement of a tracking device on a person’s car a “search” under the Fourth Amendment. The case was brought up to the Court, called United States v. Jones. The judges ruled nine-to-zero, stating the act violated the Fourth Amendment. The opinion was delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia. He said that even though the Government obtained the needed warrant from the United States District Court, the GPS installation was restricted to ten days and within the Columbia district only. Nonetheless, the GPS was there for twenty-eight days and it tracked the Jeep in Maryland too. Furthermore, The Court rejected the government’s argument that “there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a person’s movement on public thoroughfares and emphasized that the Fourth Amendment provided some protection for trespass onto personal property.” In addition, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a concurring opinion. Justice Samuel Alito also wrote a concurring and later joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan. If I were on the court, I would rule the same. The Government argued that it was a reasonable search, therefore it is lawful under the Fourth Amendment. However, they did not address it and support it. Therefore, I think the judges made a right decision to forfeit it. Furthermore, the Government clearly went over their limit by exceed the days and location that they were permitted to place the GPS device. Overall, I strongly agree with the judges’ decision and