Do Police Need a Warrant to Search Your Cellphone?

Cellphone privacy rights square off against State Federal Law Enforcement Texas Insider Report: AUSTIN Texas It would be equivalent to the government claiming that it had a right to search through the contents of your computer or your desk drawers or filing cabinets without a warrant" says the ACLUs Steven Shapiro. The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in two separate cases earlier today to determine whether or not police need a warrant to search a suspects cellphone.   Under the law police can search a person and their belongings incident to arrest" to make sure that they arent carrying any weapons or evidence that could be destroyed or tossed out. The government says that cellphones should be included in that list so that criminals or their accomplices cant delete potentially damning evidence.

In todays world cell phones are particularly likely to contain evidence of unlawful activity and to help law-enforcement officers identify suspects they have apprehended" the Justice Department argued in a brief filed with the court. And unlike other containers their contents can be destroyed or concealed after the suspect is taken into custody making it impossible or impracticable for the police ever to retrieve critical evidence."

But opponents of the searches worry that they violate the constitutional right to privacy. I think it raises a very significant tissue of personal privacy given the quantity of information most people now carry around on their cellphones" said Steven Shapiro the legal director with the American Civil Liberties Union. We dont think that should be the rule" the legal director with the American Civil Liberties Union added. Privacy rights advocates are squaring off against state and federal law enforcement officials who have defended the searches as reasonable steps to ensure that evidence isnt lost from a persons phone. Searches of cell phones at the scene of arrest moreover can quickly alert officers that confederates or others are coming to the scene helping them avoid potentially dangerous encounters" the administration added. The two cases before the court center around an alleged drug dealer and gang member whose phones police searched without a warrant. In Riley v. California which will be argued first David Riley was stopped for having expired license plates and police found two guns in the car. They searched his phone and found photos and videos that showed him in gang poses and later used records to show that the phone had been used near a recent shooting. United States v. Wurie the second case deals with an alleged Boston drug dealer. Brima Wurie was arrested after police saw him in a drug deal and found drugs in his pockets. After the arrest his cellphone was getting repeated calls from a number that police tracked to his home where they found drugs and a gun. For more on the issue read Texas technology expert Ron Yokubaitiss (right) Protect Your Privacy & Property: Say NO" to NSAs Surveillance State.