From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

A cell phone is a radio. Yesterday's ruling in which a geofence warrant
is a search warrant for the purpose of the Fourth Amendment and is
therefore subject to the "reasonableness" standard is contrary to the
basic facts of technology.

Similarly, I believe if the government or a private party has encrypted communication, but uses radio, it shouldn't be a breach of federal
computer security laws if an individual (other than an NSA staffer)
decrypts it. But what's legal for the government to do is illegal for
everyone else.

Now, I am sympathetic to an argument that there is an expectation of
privacy for plenty of objects that we carry that are not radios but, unbeknownst to the user, has an RFID array built in to be a functional transponder, or is even capable of a weak broadcast signal. Household appliances have "internet of things" built in.

But how does one not understand that a cell phone is a radio?

A federal credit union was robbed of $200,000. Google was served with a geofence arrant, which swept up records on numerous people who had
nothing to do with the crime. Police narrowed the records to identify a
prime suspect, then searched his residences.

At trial, the judge ruled that the warrant lacked probable cause but
allowed the use of the inculpatory evidence as "good faith", that
judicial activism exception to the Fourth Amendment.

In the Fourth Amendment, search warrants are issued upon probable cause
but search and seizure are subject to a reasonableness standard. These
are treated as separate clauses with different case law, despite plenty
of overlap. It confuses the hell out of me.

At Fourth Circuit, the robber lost the appeal as he had no expectation
of privacy ih a ruling by the three-judge panel The panel was upheld en
banc but the circuit was split.

Kagan's ruling that there is Fourth Amendment protection, "expectation
of privacy is one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable,"
is absurd.

In the movies, we often get a scene in which the mastermind directs the henchmen to remove all identification, keys, and cell phones. If one
wishes to make a living as a criminal, we don't need to protect one from
his own folly of using a cell phone during the robbery.

She was joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, and Jackson.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

A cell phone is a radio. Yesterday's ruling in which a geofence warrant
is a search warrant for the purpose of the Fourth Amendment and is
therefore subject to the "reasonableness" standard is contrary to the
basic facts of technology.

I said I was confused.

The search -- apparantly either the database search or the review of the results -- is subject to the "reasonableness" standard, NOT THE WARRANT
ITSELF. Whether the WARRANT was subject to the probable cause standard
was not at issue. That's the aspect that's more concerning, but that
wasn't raised at trial.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2