The Constitutional Accountability Center, which like the EFF filed a brief in the case, said it was a good day for the “Bill of Rights”. Doug Kendall, CAC president, said searching cell phones without a warrant was “even more intrusive” than “similar searches of colonial-era homes, which the Founders fought against in the Revolutionary War”.
美国最高法院驳回了加州一案中的判决。
The case originated from two incidents where police searched phones. In Riley v California, police found incriminating photos and other information on a smartphone connecting a suspect to a shooting, which state courts said was legal. But another case in Boston reached the opposite conclusion, where a call on a suspect’s feature phone (not as advanced as a smartphone) was used to discover where he lived. The evidence in that case was thrown out by a federal appeals court.
罗伯茨表示,这一裁决对于执法机构打击犯罪的能力可能会有影响。他写道:“手机已成为犯罪团伙成员协调和沟通的重要辅助工具,能够提供极有价值的危险罪行定罪信息。但保护隐私还是要付出代价的。”
【美最高法将智能手机内容纳入隐私保护】相关文章:
★ 国产羽绒服在美卖疯了,纽约街头撞衫率爆表!加拿大鹅:我不要面子吗
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15