Leonardo Angiulo: How Much Privacy Did You Lose This Week? A Lot.
Monday, June 10, 2013
#1: DNA swabs now okay
For years, people have been fingerprinted and photographed when they are arrested. This is true for everything from disturbing the peace to bank robbery. The Supreme Court's decision in Maryland v. King means that as of June 3, 2013 you can add a DNA swab to the list of booking procedures you could endure if arrested for a felony. The logic goes that because the personal invasion of swabbing a cheek for DNA is slight, and having a DNA database helps solve crimes, there is no constitutional violation. While some people may see this as startling, others may see it as an extension of fingerprinting and a common sense updating of law enforcement's tool box.
#2: Metadata from your phone records
In a similar way the recent disclosure of metadata collection from Verizon, including inbound and outbound call logs, sounds like an extension of an old investigatory tool called a pen register. The statutory authority for these call logs defines pen registers in 18 USC §3127 as only recording where communications come from or go to. The law explicitly declares pen registers shall not include the contents of telephone communications.
With this definition in mind, the recent press release from the Director of National Intelligence on this topic makes a great deal of sense. There is no question that the program initially disclosed in the UK's newspaper The Guardian does not listen in on people's phone calls. We can believe this because the use of pen registers by law enforcement agencies has been going on almost as long as there have been telephones and it has never been about content. Just connections.
#3: Reading your emails
What seems to be the newest addition to law enforcement's stable is the program referred to as “PRISM” by members of the press reporting on it. These reports cite certain leaked materials as proving the existence of a sweeping government program that is reading our emails on an ongoing basis. In response, the Director of National Intelligence released a second statement to the press regarding the collection of communications and cited the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as the basis for their actions.
Citing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act invokes certain portions of the United States Code focusing on Foreign powers, their agents or those acting on their behalf. When members of the executive branch identify such parties as targets of investigation, surveillance may be ordered without a court order or by applying to a judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a surveillance order. An important distinction in the court order is that it may only issue upon a showing of probable cause based on written statements made under oath or affirmation. Of note is that 50 USC §1805 both allows for these orders and makes anybody complying with them immune from lawsuits if they cooperate with these requests for information.
Now, there are many things we can't know simply because of the clandestine nature of the information gathered and the parties doing the gathering. Based on the plain language of the applicable statutes, however, we have a pretty good idea that it's got something to do with national security. But unlike pen registers, taking information during booking or even good old fashioned bugged phones, the collection of electronic communication is a brave new world.
Leonardo Angiulo is an Attorney with the firm of Glickman, Sugarman, Kneeland & Gribouski in Worcester handling legal matters across the Commonwealth. He can be reached by email at [email protected] or through the firm's website at www.gskandglaw.com.
Related Articles
- Leonardo Angiulo: Putting A Price On Wrongful Death
- Leonardo Angiulo: The Importance of Filling out Financial Statements in Probate Court
- Leonardo Angiulo: Are Forced Blood Tests Constitutional in DUI Arrests?
- Leonardo Angiulo: Recent Antitrust Lawsuit Protects Our Access to Beer
- Leonardo Angiulo: The Importance of Understanding Your Auto Insurance Coverage
- Leonardo Angiulo: Changes on the Horizon for Crime Scene Investigation
- Leonardo Angiulo: Statutes of Limitations May Bring Your Past into the New Year
- Leonardo Angiulo: This Is Our City, You Play By Our Rules
- Leonardo Angiulo: Criminal Justice—What The TV Shows Leave Out
- Leonardo Angiulo: Surviving Party Season With Your Teenager
- Leonardo Angiulo: Two Supreme Court Decisions Shaping the Gun Control Debate
- Leonardo Angiulo: Did Worcester’s City Solicitor File Strategic Litigation Against Public Policy?
- Leonardo Angiulo: Swearing To Tell The Truth Means Something
- Leonardo Angiulo: What Happens To Digital Property When You Die?
- Leonardo Angiulo: Exactly What Happens After She Has Your Baby
- Leonardo Angiulo: The Difference Between MA Law and Oscar Pistorius’ Bail Hearing
- Leonardo Angiulo: Why You Should Think Twice Before Secretly Recording With Your Cellphone
- Leonardo Angiulo: How Much Privacy Did You Lose This Week? A Lot.
- Leonardo Angiulo: The Discovery Process in Civil Cases
- Leonardo Angiulo: Wicked Bad Storms and Eminent Domain
- Leonardo Angiulo: How To Survive Tax Day (and Stay Out of Jail)
- Leonardo Angiulo: Parents’ Ability to Get a Restraining Order to Protect Their Kids
- Leonardo Angiulo: The Governor’s Authority to Issue a Travel Ban
- Leonardo Angiulo: A New Law That Will Let You Have More E-Privacy
- Leonardo Angiulo: Mental Health Issues and the Legal System
Follow us on Pinterest Google + Facebook Twitter See It Read It