Police Given Direct Line To Cell Phone Searches

DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – Think about all the personal information we keep in our cell phones: It’s something to consider after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit ruled it is now legal for police to search cell phones without a warrant.

Former Dallas FBI Agent Danny Defenbaugh said the ruling gives law enforcement a leg up. “I think not only will it help them, but it could be life saving,” said the former Special Agent, who was based in Dallas.

The decision stems from an Indiana case where police arrested a man for dealing drugs. An officer searched the suspect’s cell phone without warrant.

The judge in the appeal case, Judge Richard Posner, agreed that the officer had to search the phone immediately or risk losing valuable evidence. Judge Posner ruled it was a matter of urgency, arguing it was possible for an accomplice to wipe the phone clean using a computer or other remote device.

Defenbaugh says the ruling takes into account exigent or time-sensitive circumstances that could be life saving in more urgent cases, such as child abduction. “If the child is alive and you’re only minutes behind, that could be critical to recovering that child alive,” added Defenbaugh.

Judge Posner ruled that the search was legal because the officer conducted a limited search and only looked for phone numbers associated with the alleged drug deal. The judge argued it was similar to  flipping through a diary to search for basic information such as addresses and phone numbers.

Paul Coggins is the former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. Coggins says the court’s ruling pushes the envelope on privacy issues and wonders if it opens the door to more extensive searches down the road. “Does that mean officers now have the right to search through your phone, search through your search history, your photographs, your e-mails and the rest, because it could all be wiped clean,” Coggins asked.

Many critics are asking the same question. They call the ruling an invasion of privacy that far outweighs the needs of law enforcement.

Both Defenbaugh and Coggins agree that the case is likely to go to the U.S. Supreme court.

Also Check Out:


One Comment

  1. bloward says:

    yet another judge that has never read the Constitution…..

    1. Jim Dea says:

      We’re toast.

      1. Joe Potus says:

        Agreed. Presumption of guilt. Additionally, judicial powers given to the police to determine guilt.

        You are speeding.
        You must be drinking.
        You must be doping.
        You must be a drug dealer.
        You must be a killer.
        oops… what’s this? Looks like anti government talk.
        Bam. Head shot reduces costs.
        hmmm…. not enough speeders.
        Pass a law against “distracted driving”
        Eating a fry? Drinking coffee…
        …start process all over again.


      3. LTCB says:

        Joe, did you mention, “You are breathing.”?

      4. patriot_weatherman says:

        It’s perverse, but at least you can still mail in (snail mail) your bomb threats. Uh-oh, this means they’ll get it too late.

      5. Oe says:

        Like always, will it be used in good faith with good intentions and only when completely necessary?
        Interesting times


      6. Ralph says:

        Yup its all coming to a head now right before 2012 go figure. We are losing constitutional rights faster than we could ever imagine, American citizens are fair game with no trial if they are designated “terrorists”.

        I say be prepared for anything that happens… lock and load America!

    2. scottrb says:

      That judge is a traitor. That’s the excuse that Holder gave for thinking its patriotic to kill u.s. citizens abroad.. time was of the essence. So, when time is of the essence, we have no rights. That’s oppression.

      1. LTCB says:

        Yah, think? The whole point of the Constitution was to prevent these very things. For ANY law enforcement type to go past that is a violation of the Constitution and a violation of ALL OF OUR RIGHTS.

    3. Regulas says:

      7th Circus court, Imagine That. I don’t own a cell phone, it’s the fascist FED tracking tool.

      1. Brown says:

        I spell it “FED”, but F’ed!

      2. Andrew P. says:

        Wow, you don’t own a cell phone because it is a “fascist” tracking tool? Do you own a car, because they can be tracked too? How about a computer (searches are easily traceable)? Ever left the house – or are you afraid the Feds will follow your every move via satellite?

        At some point, you have to realize that the government COULD track any of us. But why would they? If you’re not doing anything WRONG, then they have no reason to bother you. Sure, things are getting out of hand in this quasi-police state. But to not carry a cell phone, haha, because it’s “fascist”. That’s a stretch, amigo.

      3. Bunky says:

        @andrew p,
        the government will track you because it can.
        Get that through the skull full of mush.

      4. Bunky says:

        The government will track because it can.
        Wake up fool.

      5. David Schulz, CIPP says:

        @Andrew What you are saying might have been accurate in the 70s… too much information, no technology to absorb it, correlate it. Stasi died under the weight of its own data before the Wall fell. But today? If it can be tracked, it will; if the current administration doesn’t have need for it, some future admin will. The notion that if you’re not doing anything wrong, you shouldn’t care, pesumes you know what the government will consider “wrong” … not just this year, but next year and as long as data lives.

    4. ctiZEN says:

      Use encryption people. Another judge recently ruled that police can NOT force you to decrypt!

      1. jj says:

        not yet

      2. Jeff says:

        They might be able to hack into or decrypt the phone. Militarization and police control are heavily subsidized by taxpayers and I’m sure they can find a way around that.

      3. rigdriver01 says:

        They are way ahead of you ctiZEN,

        they already have a device that law enforcement has been using to plug into your phone that can crack/bypass your encryption and access your phone. there was an article all over the web about 6 months ago about it.

        Cant remember the staty, but they were using it during traffic stops and asking offenders if they could scan their phones. And the shock was fully half allowed their phones to be plugged in without probable cause, just their consent.. It downloads all your info in the phone in a matter of a few seconds.

      4. Freeland Dave says:

        But what you fail to know citZEN i that all encryption software used in the US today by law has to be Registered with the government. And along with that registration comes the keys to crack that encryption any time they desire. encryption only protects you from the average citizen, not the government who, for reasons only known to them, can look at your encrypted files any time they so desire. And if you create your own software to encrypt your own data and don’t register it with the government they can take you out of circulation because that too is now against the law.

    5. N says:

      A Republican judge appointed by a Republican President.

      1. Seriously?! says:

        D-bag ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^, the President has nothing to do with appointing a State Supreme Court Judge; hence, STATE not FEDERAL.

        Another liberal that can’t get the facts straight.

      2. mark says:

        Hey Seriously, You give us conservatives a bad name by being so stupid. You are wrong on two accounts. the US Court of Appeals is a federal post and Reagan appointed him.

      3. Rich says:

        The parties don’t matter. Pay attention. They promise different things, but actually do only what their handlers demand. Demopublicans. No difference. The ruling class is tightening the noose.

      4. rigdriver01 says:

        The 7th circuit court of appeals; if I am not mistaken; is one of the most liberal appeals courts in the land.

      5. LJ says:

        rigdriver01, you would be incorrect. The 7th Circuit has some of the biggest and most influential conservative-leaning judges in the courts of appeal.

      6. Tanner101 says:

        To Seriously?:

        Yes, facts are important. Judge Posner sits on the United States 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. This is a Federal, not a State, court. United States Circuit Court Judges are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. I do not recall who appointed Judge Posner. I only know that he has been on the bench for quite some time now.

      7. rigdriver01 says:

        LJ, I was incorrect….I was thinking of the 9th circuit. My bad 🙂

    6. Know your Judges says:

      Judge Posner is a VERY conservative jurist–some would say the LEADING conservative jurist. The only reason he is not a SCOTUS judge is because he’s too conservatives for the Libs to let him on.

      1. grizzled says:

        Yeah, but how old is the guy. People tend to become more liberal as they get older. As they get older, their mental capacity towards freedom is diminished in favor of being cared for by someone else.

    7. makanik says:

      The ORIGINAL 13th. Amendment to U.S. Constitution would negate ALL lawyers from being judges, as to pass the BAR would be considered a renouncement of their citizenship making them (even today) a subject of the Queen of England. Check out the definition and substance of THE BAR!!! For more info; davis32208@hotmail.com

    8. Constitution says:

      I agree. I bet the Judge can’t spell Constitution. They won’t be reading my phone. This govt. is out of control and has been for decades…. That whenever any form of Govt. becomes destructive of these ends, IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to ABOLISH IT.

      1. MuneShadowe says:

        Yes he can, he spells it constipation.

    9. Rawn Pawl says:

      Oh, Judgy read the constitution, but got paid by some lobbyist folks. Libs are gonna have their communism much earlier than they ever imagined.

    10. Nick says:

      In the case referred to, a suspect was arrested on drug charges. When he was arrested, his phone was with him, which could technically make it evidence. Searching it without a warrant isn’t unconstitutional, because he was arrested without a warrant, he was arrested on probably cause.

      If this were referring to police grabbing your phone without arresting you, or confiscating your property without a warrant OR arrest, then you would have reason to worry. I undertand you came here from Drudge. So did I. Do yourself a favor and read past the headlines and opening statement of the article.

      The bottom line is that for this search to happen, the suspect had to be arrested first. Because eh was arrested without a warrant, there had to have been probable cause that he was committing or had committed a crime. Post-arrest, interrogating his phone is no different than interrogating his person.

      1. Just Sayin' says:

        Excellent reply and spot on. Interesting how nobody comments on the posts with a true and logical explanation. I wonder how the “conspiracy theorists” would feel if the dope their kid od’s on came from the arrested dealer and the cops didn’t do their job by following all possible leads. I am sure that would be the cops fault then too, right???

    11. geo says:

      we njeed to IMPEACH such judges….lets do

    12. Deandre Andres says:

      it’ll go to the Supreme Court, and as long as it gets there before Obama puts up another judge, then it will get overturned because it’s simply ridiculous.

  2. bloward says:

    yet another judge that has never read the Constitution…..

    1. LC says:

      Fourth Amendment to the Constitution is crystal clear on this:

      “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.”

      My personal cell phone is an EFFECT.

      No warrant, no searching.

      This “judge” needs to be tried for treason for attempting to abridge our natural rights under the color of law.

      1. Stephen says:

        Totally AGREE!

      2. Міша says:

        But you are only protected “against unreasonable searches”. The whole hoopla is whether this particular search was REASONABLE. And the judge decided, that it was…

      3. DMAC says:

        They claim they can legally make you give blood to determine if you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol, that is an invasion upon “my person” and focres me to incriminate myself. Do these judges ever read? Have they ever read the constitution? This is tyrrany and we should not tolerate it.

      4. Hal Jordan says:

        Absolutely it was reasonable. If you are arrested, everything you have in your possession is now available for the police to search. Solution: don’t do anything that will get you arrested, and they can’t search your phone.

      5. DMAC says:

        TSA officer to Hal Jordan, “you’re under arrest for speaking out against the government”
        Hal Jordan,”but I didn’t do anything”
        TSA officer, ” take everything he owns and search it, and then search everyone in his contacts list on his cell phone and computer and take what they have too, and then search their cell phones and computers for contacts, and take their stuff too………and on and on an don.
        “He who gives up freedom for security shall have neither freedom or security” Benjamin Franklin
        Excuse me hal, but I’ll take Franklins advise over your opinion.

      6. DMAC says:

        Miwa, it states “supported by Oath or affirmation”, an offucer has to swear he saw something, like the marijauna was sitting in plain sight. Affirmation meaning their has to be witnesses to collaborate what the person asking for the warrant is telling the truth.
        Don’t give up your freedoms so easily my friiend, a lot of blood was spilled to obtain them for you. Those freedoms belong not onlu to us, to to future generations of Americans, they are not ours to give away, they are our to protect an die for.

      7. Patrick Henry says:

        Why do all you anti-constitutional dolts always answer with do not do anything to get arrested and you have nothing to worry about? Are you really that naive? Surely, you know of cases where individuals are arrested under false pretenses and then charged with some crime they were never accused of. Are you so naive to not know that with 4500 Federal Statues all of us commit criminalacts everyday and we aren’t aware of it. Please, the founders and framers placed this restriction on the government because of the tentency of government to oppress the people with unreasonable searches and detainments.

      8. Ron says:

        Bravo! Agreed.

      9. Hal Jordan says:


        Adjust that tinfoil hat and cue the black helicopters. The Thought Police are coming to arrest you and confiscate your shadow. They will take away your birthday and demagnetize all your credit cards too!

        Okay, feet firmly back on the ground now? Great. Check this out:


        “In addition, it is entirely reasonable for the arresting officer to search for and seize any evidence on the arrestee’s person in order to prevent its concealment or destruction.”

        This is all basic Constitutional law, reaffirmed daily by law enforcement officers all over the country. I’m sorry it’s so confusing to you.

      10. NickRobets says:

        He was arrested on probable cause….with his phone in his possession.I see no violation of the 4th amendment.

  3. Winky says:

    We have sold our souls to the devil.

    1. Joe Doakes says:

      For paper money and the false promise of “health care.”

      We were suckers.

      1. Eric Long says:

        Bread and circuses my friends.

      2. TheFatLadyIsSinging says:

        Not all of us were suckers. We were outvoted.

      3. CanYouHearMeNow says:

        Like after the coup and cover up we became a country where the police follow a rule of law. Fact of the matter is unelected officials took over Washington and the media for domestic spying purposes. They fear the truth leaking out. We have no democracy, no president, and freedom of press is an illusion.

        This next election is shaping up to be as big of a sham as the last. Do you know why Sarah Palin’s bus tour was really canceled? Do you know why she stayed 30 miles away from the second debate and chose the death of Steve Jobs to announce that she’s not running? Know what leaked out? Sarah Palin and Cain aren’t in the race for the same reason, the truth leaked out. Search PalinsDirtyLittleSecret for the biggest cover up in history

    2. paull ford says:

      you have. others prefer common sense conservatives with a BRAIN.

      1. ItsOver says:

        Who would be those common sense conservatives?

      2. woodNfish says:

        If you mean you are willing to give away your rights in return for some false sense of safety, you are an idiot.

  4. Arrest the traitors to the Constitution says:

    A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.

    But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

    For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.
    He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.

    ~ Marcus Tullius Cicero, Roman Statesman, philosopher and orator (42 B.C) ——– http://911essentials.com

    1. ItsOver says:

      The quotes are so appropriate.

      1. bob dobbs says:

        Look on YouTube for this: MCSO: Obama Eligibility Cold Case Investigation (Full Press Conference) wow! If that doesn’t wake you up and get your attention, we might as well accept what we will get and continue to get.

      2. Obama-Biden 2012: YES WE CAN... AGAIN! says:

        @ bob dobbs
        I just reported you to http://www.AttackWatch.net

      3. woodNfish says:

        Obama-Biden 2012: YES WE CAN… AGAIN! is a nazi dirtbag.

      4. bob dobbs says:

        @Obama-Biden 2012: YES WE CAN… AGAIN!

        Reporting you to the FBI as a domestic terrorist for threatening me.

        Have a great day.

      5. Jerry Lewis says:

        Here’s something the Dallas police and FBI can investigate:

        Obama’s Original vault copy of Certificate of Live Birth in the USA: — Released 4.27.2011 raises as many questions as it answers.

        Obama/Dunham marriage license — Not released

        Soetoro/Dunham marriage license — Not released

        Soetoro adoption records — Not released

        Fransiskus Assisi School School application — Released

        Punahou School records — Not released

        Selective Service Registration — Released – Proven Counterfeit

        Occidental College records — Not released

        Passport (Pakistan) — Not released

        Columbia College records — Not released

        Columbia thesis — Not released

        Harvard College records — Not released

        Harvard Law Review articles — None (maybe 1, Not Signed)

        Baptism certificate — None

        Medical records — Not released

        Illinois State Senate records — None (Locked up to prohibit public view)

        Illinois State Senate schedule — Lost (All other Illinois state senators’ records are intact)

        Law practice client list — Not released

        University of Chicago scholarly articles — None

      6. Molly Jefferson says:

        Obama list of Historic firsts ….

        • First President to Preside Over a Cut to the Credit Rating of the United States Government

        • First President to Violate the War Powers Act

        • First President to Orchestrate the Sale of Murder Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels

        • First President to issue an unlawful “recess-appointment” while the U.S. Senate remained in session (against the advice of his own Justice Department).

        • First President to be Held in Contempt of Court for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

        • First President to Defy a Federal Judge’s Court Order to Cease Implementing the ‘Health Care Reform’ Law

        • First President to halt deportations of illegal aliens and grant them work permits, a form of stealth amnesty roughly equivalent to “The DREAM Act”, which could not pass Congress

        • First President to Require All Americans to Purchase a Product From a Third Party

        • First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on ‘Shovel-Ready’ Jobs — and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs

        • First President to sue states for requiring valid IDs to vote, even though the same administration requires valid IDs to travel by air

        • First President to Abrogate Bankruptcy Law to Turn Over Control of Companies to His Union Supporters

        • First President to sign into law a bill that permits the government to “hold anyone suspected of being associated with terrorism indefinitely, without any form of due process. No indictment. No judge or jury. No evidence. No trial. Just an indefinite jail sentence.”

        • First President to Bypass Congress and Implement the DREAM Act Through Executive Fiat

        • First President to Threaten Insurance Companies After They Publicly Spoke out on How Obamacare Helped Cause their Rate Increases

        • First President to Threaten an Auto Company (Ford) After It Publicly Mocked Bailouts of GM and Chrysler

        • First President to “Order a Secret Amnesty Program that Stopped the Deportations of Illegal Immigrants Across the U.S., Including Those With Criminal Convictions”

        • First President to Demand a Company Hand Over $20 Billion to One of His Political Appointees

        • First President to Terminate America’s Ability to Put a Man into Space.

        • First President to Encourage Racial Discrimination and Intimidation at Polling Places

        • First President to Have a Law Signed By an ‘Auto-pen’ Without Being “Present”

        • First President to Arbitrarily Declare an Existing Law Unconstitutional and Refuse to Enforce It

        • First President to Tell a Major Manufacturing Company In Which State They Are Allowed to Locate a Factory

        • First President to refuse to comply with a House Oversight Committee subpoena.

        • First President to File Lawsuits Against the States He Swore an Oath to Protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN, etc.)

        • First President to Withdraw an Existing Coal Permit That Had Been Properly Issued Years Ago

        • First President to Fire an Inspector General of Americorps for Catching One of His Friends in a Corruption Case

        • First President to Propose an Executive Order Demanding Companies Disclose Their Political Contributions to Bid on Government Contracts

        • First President to allow Mexican police to conduct law enforcement activities on American soil

        • First President to Golf 90 or More Times in His First Three Years in Office

        But remember: he will not rest until all Americans have jobs, affordable homes, green-energy vehicles, and the environment is repaired, etc., etc., etc

    2. Cvale says:

      Sadly this is NOT 1984 it is 2012 and we have the government subverting the constitution daily in this nation ! Holder said it’s fine to target and kill Americans too ! I’m all for killing the terrorist ….. After he/she has been given due process !

      1. Frank says:

        And the traitor of which Holder is one.

  5. TheMediaIsStupid says:

    Yes. Let’s use hypothetical situations and assumptions based on nothing to push legislation… the country is a joke.

  6. Joe Klip says:

    We are becoming a nation of slaves.

    1. John C says:

      This country long ago decided that protecting little children from any possible threat is much more important than liberty, except for little children in foreign countries-those can be blown to hell.

      1. DMAC says:

        It is not the responsibility of the government of the United States to protect children in foreign countries. That responsibility belongs to the government of the country the little foreign child lives in. Stick to the subject matter pleae. The subject is the United States Constitution and our Bill of Rights. It’s what gives you the right and ability to post on sites like this.

    2. MamaConchita says:

      What? “Becoming” a nation of slaves. We already are! For many of us, we are white slaves on Uncle Sam’s plantation taxed to death for the benefit of the minorities.

      1. Patrick Henry says:

        Not yet, but quickly getting there. Slaves aren’t allowed to own guns, once they try to take that, then we are officially slaves.

        Don’t be an Unarmed Sheep!

      2. Cindy says:

        GET a grip.

    3. mark says:

      try this, pay off your mortgage but don’t pay your real estate taxes and see what happens to your private property in a few years… Libertarian ideology has the right idea that protectoin of personal property = freedom.

  7. ItsOver says:

    Unfeaking real!

  8. Mike Jones says:

    If the majority of the judges on this circuit are investigated, I bet they are Demo appointees.

    I do not care how old you are, or how much experience you have, every judge before sworn in should take a test on the US COnstitution.

    1. Frank says:

      And there should be no life appointments. There needs to be term and age limits on all judgeships.

    2. Me says:

      Gee, you really need to do some research and re-think your thoughts of being competent about politics. 7 out of 10 current active members of this Circuit are Republican nominees—and conservative Republicans are the ones who tend to be more permissive towards allowing police searches and seizures. If you want to weigh more towards personal freedoms rather than permissive police searches then go Democrat—if you want to lean towards personal freedom but hold conservative views on government spending, budget, and other similar economic matters then think about Libertarian.

    3. Jojo says:

      On October 27, 1981, Posner was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

    4. Lebek Johnson says:

      You might be surprised. Conservatives tend to push greater restrictions of Civil Liberties (especially since the inception of the War on Drugs).

      1. mark says:

        Don’t know if that’s a true statement. I think it is more correct that the Repubs tend to trample on certain rights while the Dem’s trample on the ones left over.

    5. oldcutlas says:

      posner was appointed to the court of appeals by REAGAN!!

  9. steve5150 says:

    This does not seem constitutional to me but I have noticed a growing number of court decisions where the judges involved don,t seem to have ever read the constitution.

  10. John L. says:

    This NEEDS to be overturned! A clear violation of the 4th.

    1. Rich in Cali says:

      How so? In fact, this could be construed as a ‘search incidental to arrest.’

      1. oldcutlas says:

        even a search incidental to arrest should need a warrant!! Getting arrested doesn’t automatically make you a criminal!! Has everyone forgotten the basis for our criminal system “innocent till proven guilty”???The fourth amendment doesn’t say JACK about getting searched when you’re arrested!! the reason they search you before throwing you in a cell is to make sure you have no weapons or contraband!!!

      2. ItsOver says:

        They havent forgotten sir. They dont know their rights. Sad days for sure.

      3. Scott in Midwest says:

        Ya! There could be a Knife or gun hidden in the phone’s address book! Or drugs! Best to pat down those 1s and 0s. (idiot)

  11. Lone_Gunman45 says:

    Yet another of our “rights” down the toilet! This is an example of good intentions resulting in unintended consequences as it opens the door for mass abuse of our rights to privacy!

    Communism at it’s finest under the guise of catching bad guys?

    1. DW says:

      You’re a fool if you believe ANY of this is the result of good intentions gone bad. Good intentions are as rare as unicorns with that crew.

    2. mark says:

      Not communism, the judge was appointed by the granddady of conservatisim Ronald Reagan

  12. Dave says:

    Looks like these guys haven’t seen the SCOTUS’ ruling on warrantless GPS tracking–this signals another bench slap for the 7th circuit because the SCOTUS is sick and tired of the police attempting to erode the 4th amendment. Sorry guys, a phone is just like a closed container, you can’t just start searching it without a warrant.

    1. dave says:

      In United States vs Jones there was more of a time factor involved than appears in this case. In Jones they had a warrant, but let it expire prior to attaching the device. I can see lots of issues with these warrantless searches, but I don’t think Jones is a good precedent. I believe Chimel vs. California is a better precedent with the phone’s contents falling in the category of “destructible evidence”.

    2. DW says:

      Apparently, you can.

    3. dave says:

      When the make an arrest they must have developed a probable cause for the arrest. The search must be confined to evidence which relates to the probable cause or the immediate safety of the arresting officer. If they find evidence that is unrelated to the probable cause and the search was involuntary, it will likely be excluded in court. No fishing expeditions at the sobriety checkpoint.

  13. merphisellis says:

    Obama and now Judge Richard Posner are impeachable for not understaining what the Constitution sayes!

    To h377 with them both!

    I will be tossing the cell phone today!

  14. chuckly says:

    let me get this straight, the same people crying about the constitution in this case are the same ones that have no problem with us torturing prisoners who ‘may’ have information we need? Is that how this goes?

    1. Mike Jones says:

      One is criminal law one is terrorism. The former is afforded by due process, the latter isn’t.

      You really know nothing about law do you?

      1. chuckly says:

        Torturing is illegal, but bush did it anyway. But, don’t worry, I understand. Bush was a republican, so it’s ok for him to wipe his a$$ with the constitution.

    2. KW says:

      The Constitution only applies to U.S. citizens I believe. Terrorists are not citizens, so you have to go to some other authority besides the Constitution.

      1. Know-it-mostly-not all says:

        Yep. The Genevea Conventions apply to terrorist, and if accurately interpreted, terrorist are eligible for immediate exectution upon capture. So Guantanomo and all the secret prisons are actually better treatment than they are eligible for.

      2. DonnieB says:

        Right On KW

      3. snipelee says:

        The Geneva Convention applies to nationally constituted AND uniformed armed forces – not terrorists

      4. Eric Long says:

        Except when they are US citizens like Anwar al-Awlaki?

      5. me says:

        Anwar Al-alwaki was a anchor baby

      6. Jimmy says:

        NTM Im pretty sure the torture of enemy combatants is a Geneva convention thing. More of a “treaty”. I am not aware of ANY Constitutional Amendment that protects enemy combatants, and I am CERTAIN its NOT covered by the Bill of Rights. Terrorists are by there own actions, enemy combatants. There is no other classification that fits them. That is what they are, and if you ask them, they will TELL you that is what they are. No remorse, blowing themselves up for the sake of some Fanatical Cleric who promises something he cannot guarantee in the afterlife. God, Allah, Zeus, Yahweh, pick a god, they all represent the SAME God. Just different ways of seeing and understanding Him. If people would UNDERSTAND THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT, they would see that God (Allah) would never willfully command the destruction of his own creation. Only MAN would do that. Get that through your heads. MAN, not GOD orders MANS destruction. GOD did his part by giving you the FREE WILL to do it. The test is to see if your Godlike enough to NOT do it. Sadly, it is a test many of us fail. And sadly for God, he will remain alone as none of his creation is up to the task.

      7. dave says:

        Actually, I believe the US Constitution applies to all persons who are physically present on US territory.

      8. DMAC says:

        Jimmy, The United States has been snookered by the liberals. Terrorist who carry no flag, wear no countries uniform and fight for no recognized government are nothing but terrorist. They are’nt even combatants. They are criminals acting in organized violence and are actually entitled to no rights what so ever and the United States could claim that position and there is nothing any court in the world could do about it. The rules set forth by the Geneva Convention are only for those fughting for a country and or government, not for individuals or small groups of individuals. The United States needs to just shoot these animals on sight. You don’t ever hear of anyone telling the Chinese or the Russioans to treat the terorist they deal with to give them a trail do you? No, becauase China and Russia would tell them to go to hell.

    3. jerry says:

      Hey Chuly while you cry about the tortiring of prisoners. Take a step back and look at you POTUS and Mr Holder have declared that it is ok to KILL US citizens over seas .. WAKE UP MAN and quick drinking the KOOL AID

    4. oldcutlas says:

      only because they are too stupid to realize that Posner is a reagan appointee!! they all think Obama appointed him ROFLMAO!!!

  15. plainolamerican says:

    From Plato’s book:
    “Won’t he smile in welcome at anyone he meets, saying that he’s no tyrant, making all sorts of promises both in public and in private, freeing the people from debt, redistributing land to them, his followers, and pretending to be gracious and gentle to all?”
    However after a series of unpopular actions, including stirring up a war, the leader begins to alienate some of his most ardent advisers who begin to voice their misgivings in private. Following a purge of these advisors the tyrant attracts some of the worst elements of the state to help him rule. As the citizens grow weary of his tenure the tyrant chooses to attract foreigners to resupply his dwindling bodyguards. The citizens finally decide they’ve had enough and begin to discuss rebellion.
    At this point in the story the student asks his teacher incredulously: “What do you mean? Will the tyrant dare to use violence against [the people] imprison or to hit [them] if [they] don’t obey? The teacher answers,
    “Yes – once he’s taken away [the people’s] weapons.”
    The name of book 8 in the 10 book series from Plato Is THE REPUBLIC.

    1. Jose says:

      Yep. I know was thinking the same thing. We are right now, as Plato correctly predicts, on the edge of tyranny.

  16. NiteNurse says:

    If you haven’t committed a criminal act then there is usually no reason for the pokice to need to have access to your cell phone. Drug dealers usually store a lot of information on their phones that will help put these criminals away. What if someone you loved was killed and the killer texted your loved one. It’s important information. I don’t have a problem with allowing law enforcement to gather information from a cell phone if they believe a crime has been committed.

    1. bman says:

      It violates the 4th Amendment plain and simple. I don’t care if it “saves lives” or whatever excuse you use, the Constitution is the rule of law in this country. Read it! Learn it! Understand it!

    2. DeMouk says:

      Then they can get a warrant, like they are required to. It’s better that the guilty go free than to punish the innocent.

    3. oldcutlas says:

      INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!!! Getting arrested doesn’t make you a criminal!!!!!

    4. DMAC says:

      Someone died and lost their life so you could have the rights afforded to you by the Constitution of the United States. Why would you so easily give up something someone died to get for you?
      “One who gives up freedom for security will have neither freedom or security”, Benjamin Franklin

    5. John says:

      How naive you are. The can get your name address and phone number from your license and ASKING YOU FOR THE NUMBER! They can call it back ti see if it is correct. In your above example, they would have already searched all numbers on your ‘loved one’s’ phone AND could track the location in real time if the phone was on(or even a battery inserted). You MAY trust your local, county or state police, but do you trust the TSA,DHS,DEA or the gunrunning ATF? How about Eric Holder, you trust him? This case MUST go to the SCOTUS.

  17. Tom NJ says:

    Why not just give the cops bags that block wireless signals. They can just throw the devices in the bag. If a warrant is issued turn the radios off while it is still in the bag and then search it.

    Doesn’t this decision allow every electronic device searchable at will?

    1. Hootie00 says:

      Why not just turn the phone off until a warrant can be obtained? This will not destroy the data and insure due process. Why ignore the protections of the Constitution when a lesser means is available?

  18. Tony says:

    Judge Posner is involved in alot of high profile cases which he always rules for the government, he must be a Progressive or has been promised something if he
    rules for the PTB, powers that be, he needs to be removed.

    1. Jojo says:

      On October 27, 1981, Posner was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

    2. oldcutlas says:

      he is a radical conservative appointed by Reagan!!! ROFLMAO!!! A simple GOOGLE search will enlighten you!!!

      1. 1EasyTarget says:

        “Posner is a pragmatist in philosophy, a classical liberal in politics, and an economist in legal methodology.”


        Not what I would call a radical conservative by any means.

  19. Randy B says:

    Sure, why not? NEXT thing to do is to allow them to search your house without a warrant to prevent you from destroying evidence. Seriously, what the hell??? Apparently this judge (and MANY others) feels it’s ok to ignore the Constitution. Welcome to slavery…

  20. Onewithwords says:

    Keep stepping on the people’s necks…keep it up…

  21. bob says:

    somebody should kick that judge right in his teeth

  22. Tony says:

    If people are smart they will stop all the facebook, twitter, social activity accts
    because its all gonna be used against you at some point, I think they are afraid of the social medium, and to that they must make you wary of it now,

  23. Tony says:

    Randy thay already can search your house, with “sneak n Peek ” warrants

  24. Johnny B Goode says:

    You folks voted for the Democrats who put these ignorant judges on the bench. You now have to sleep in the bed you made. Perhaps you folks are the really ignorant ones whom if they know anything about freedom and liberty would not elect a single Democrat.

    1. ItsOver says:

      Oh boy….it really is over. Both parties could care less about liberty or freedom. Rep dem…divide and conquer

    2. Joe Smith says:

      Posner was appointed by RONALD REAGAN. Not only that, Democrat judges tend to me more protective than Republicans on civil liberties. How can you be so insanely ignorant?

      1. DeMouk says:

        The Dems are all for civil liberty until I want to carry a gun, as is my right. Then the Constitution is really vague.

      2. Joe Smith says:

        Democrat judges tend to be more protective on almost every civil liberty issue. It’s hilarious that someone is blaming Democrat judges for a decision limiting the Fourth Amendment when the judge was appointed by a Republican and is a libertarian.

      3. oldcutlas says:

        they are ignorant because their religion has strived to keep them that way (i.e. christianity)!! the same church who assured everyone that the world was flat and the universe revolves around the earth!!!

  25. Joe Smith says:

    The exact holding was that the phone number of the phone can be obtained without a warrant because this is a minimally invasive search (opening a diary to verify the owner’s name and address is permitted), and because imminent destruction of the evidence is possible.

    The Seventh Circuit did NOT hold that police could obtain content in the phone unrelated to the phone number in the phone.

    Posner is a strong libertarian, and he is very well-versed in Fourth Amendment law. As usual, the media reports legal news inaccurately to cause a stir.

    1. oldcutlas says:

      why would they need the number when they HAVE the phone???? did they want his number so they could call themselves and run up his cell bill????

      1. LJ says:

        If you would actually read the opinion rather than scream on a website, maybe it would be clearer to you.

  26. J Connor says:

    This exemplifies why everyone needs to get serious about securing their electronic devices. It’s time for all to bone up on encryption, communications security methods, remote wiping tools, video apps that upload to a cloud server, etc. Read Law Enforcement Technology magazine and you’ll see the tools of the police state that are being used against you. Any govt drone on the public payroll who advocates these tyrannical measures are guilty of treason against the people of the United States. Wake up folks, your govt has declared war on your right to freedom and privacy. Any cop who claims this is just another tool is right…it’s another tool of the police state.

  27. Bologna says:

    I would stomp/smash/destroy my own phone before I let some cop/agent violate my 4th. At least now I know to do it before they can get there grubby hands on it.


  28. Dan says:

    This seems to go a little too far, there are less intrusive means to solve the problems in that case, such as a cell phone jammer.

  29. Joe Smith says:

    Please actually read the case before you comment! The court is analogizing to opening a diary to determine the identify of the owner. This practice was already legal and was not considered a search and seizure requiring a warrant. This is not news!

  30. Zjak says:

    Hate to break it to these Judges but the Supreme Court will rule this unconstitutional per the 4th.

    1. Joe Smith says:

      Zjak can you tell me the actual reasoning of the court?

  31. joe republic says:

    benj franklin said, those that give up liberty for safety deserve neither! no truer word’s. this opens the door’s to abuse by a gustapo gov’t. what is the next freedom we wil lose? this just smacks in the face of the constitution and should be turned over at the federal level or the supreme court! and with a clown like obama and holder, this infringement on liberty will be expanded. since they already hate the constitution as most lib’s do! this judge should be hung!

  32. CH says:

    Our government has become the very wrong kind of corrupt power hungry behemoth that the revolution was fought to prevent from taking root in this land.
    Every day the traitors in office who fill our government grab for more power and take away a little more of the people’s rights and freedoms. And the American public stands by watching it all as it happens without much of a peep, much less any real refusal to accept a government that has grossly surpassed its constitutional limits. Soon it will be too late if it isn’t already to restore real individual liberty in the USA.

  33. grebis says:

    Start running some password protection with at least a 16 bit encryption code algorythm. Sit back and laugh at the poor po-po. The SCOTUS should be handing the 7th CC a royal smackdown when it hits their docket. The 4th Amendment is pretty clear on this.

    1. Eric Long says:

      Oh really? Search this device that is already in use. The CelleBrite UFED. Passwords/encryption mean nothing.

  34. Forest Wilson says:

    Oh Yeah? I go by the law of the land which reads:

    Amendment 4
    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.

    “Effects” means items such as cell phones. Further, I will exercise my 2nd amendment right to anyone who wishes to violate my 4th amendment right regarding unreasonable searches and seizures.

    AMERICA YOU HAVE A CONSTITUTION, WHICH IS THE LAW OF THE LAND. THROW THIS VIOLATOR OUT OF OFFICE, I hesitate to use the respectable term “Judge” in this case, he/she/it does not deserve such a distinction. DO NOT TRADE LIBERTY FOR SECURITY. Forest Wilson.

    1. grebis says:

      You sir, are 100% correct.

    2. Dave says:

      You’ll be a dead man, Forest. Read up on your state’s code of criminal procedure. All of you people need to do that. I was a cop for nine years; there’s a lot of stuff in there you folks are completely unaware of. Get a clue before you do something really stupid.

  35. Mark Kadziela says:

    Red Alert app on Android wipes your phone clean by just touching the app.

  36. Doug Ragan says:

    The argument makes no sense. They said this arose from a case in which a man was arrested, then his phone was searched without a warrant. If they arrested him, then didn’t they have probable cause to search his belongings?
    Searching a phone of someone who has been arrested is one thing, searching phones without probable cause or a warrant is something entirely different.

  37. uncle arty says:

    just take the Sim card out break it and you don’t have anything to worry about

  38. Tom W in PA says:

    Is that judge’s name Roger or Vladmir?

  39. JohnF says:

    Good luck with that .. you’ll have to get me to enter my password first.

  40. Ben Dover says:

    Sieg Heil!

  41. Dutra says:

    This ruling boggles the mind.

  42. Tom Higgins says:

    We have to stop the invasion of our liberties here and now.

  43. eddie too says:

    maybe we should just shoot all of the judges and start over.

    judges are the least trustworthy group in society.

  44. Joe Smith says:


  45. LIBERTY NOW says:

    Tyranny is here.The unconstitutional policies & systems that have been advancing for decades are gutting the Republic. Is there anything that we can do that is not controlled, mandated, regulated, taxed, fined, manipulated, restricted & monitored?

  46. Jay says:

    Bombard this guy’s phone and mail box until he regrets his decision!

    Hon. Richard A. Posner
    Room 2788F
    Everett McKinley Dirksen United States Courthouse
    219 S. Dearborn Street
    Chicago, IL 60604

    Judge Posner’s Chambers may be contacted through the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Clerk’s Office at (312) 435-5850.

  47. templeknight says:

    Another judge, who like obama thinks the constitution and bill of rights are to wipe
    your feet on. We need to return to pre 9/11 American sensibilities, the founders
    Adams, Franklin and Jefferson among others stated “when you exchange freedom for security, you have neither” . Vote’em out, and make clear to their replacements
    follow the constitution or you’ll be replaced!

  48. James Knowlton says:

    So a simple dope case somehow turned into this erroneous load of dung, ”If the child is alive and you’re only minutes behind, that could be critical to recovering that child alive,” added Defenbaugh.”

    As technology progresses our government finds ways of intruding into our privacy because of one reason, “it’s just gotten easier”. The principals of privacy never changed. It figures a federal agent (FBI) in this case prawns
    over all the good it will do. An agency with a history of felonious behavior
    (simple fact) that makes organized crime look small.

  49. Rodger says:

    My republican party has changed to libertarian. Three years ago everybody got on the band wagon, and all of the sudden became Constitutional experts. Did you know it wasn’t until recently in the past 100 years, that the Supreme Court started rulling that the Constitution applies to state laws? I am sure if the founders meant for that view, they would of said something immediately. Four years ago y’all sided with law enforcement, and stated that Democrats were wrong. You all are the true sheep, and flip flop. I hope you know that most police officers are republican and conservative, you are turning your back on your fellow men. I bet most of you have never even came into contact with a police officer except for speeding tickets. Until Glenn Beck came in and opened your eyes to libertarian views, then all of a sudden after years you love Ron Paul. None of you are targeted by Obama through the police, the police are still business as usual trying to get turds off the street. If anything police feel hated by both sides now, Republicans have all of a sudden taken a very liberal stance towards law enforcement, and Democrats don’t want police to enforce immigration and be PC. Local city police have been attacked over their pensions, when I contribute 250 a pay check, 500 in a 4 week month. The city plays on liberals hate for the police and the conservatives hate of the city spending money, even though the city hasn’t contributed, and spent the money on entitlement programs they have no business in. Just remember who your friends are, and remember what you believed in 10 years ago.

    1. Jose says:

      I am sure the Gestapo, probably felt the same way.

    2. Frank L. Speaking says:

      Ever heard of Article VI or Amendment 14?

  50. joe says:

    it’d be hilarious if it wasn’t frightening how many of you clowns spouting off about the constitution actually believe that a piece of paper means anything at all… typical amerikan slaves who believe that a piece of parchment encased in plexiglas guarantees you anything at all… you’re so f-ing blind to the tyranny and enslavement all around you that you actually believe you’re free… and that a piece of paper ensures that… you’re slaves – you always have been, you always will be… and the powers that be don’t even need chains or shackles anymore – they’ve succeeded in enslaving you via your own ignorance and laziness.

  51. Jose says:

    This country is pretty much done with. We have become a tyranny, oh well, it was good as long as it lasted.

  52. TeaRunner says:

    Just have ourselves to blame, if we hadn’t stopped lynching judges who take our rights away they’d still be scared of the people.

    This really does call for a tar and feathering.

  53. forwardobserver says:

    For the folks lucky (or unlucky) enough to have smart phones someone will have to invent an app that erases all your data. Maybe by putting in a different code into your lock screen. We have to start fighting back against this police state.

  54. ILIkeRush says:

    I don’t have anything to hide but I feel like they are taking away my freedom little by little.

  55. Bruce says:

    Well, now let’s level the playing field here. If the cops can search my cell phone without a warrant, then anything they find on said phone is inadmissable in court.

  56. Policefromhell says:

    another day in police state hell. I say simply this do not store any data on your phone that you don’t want the police state to have. Keep it simple sheeple.

  57. Agent VX says:

    This judge would be a perfect fit ni the old USSR, and maybe even in the new Russia. Also, I recommend he take up residence in some place that has a legal system consistent with his ruling, like China, Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, or Iran.

  58. Jeff says:

    Regarding the Geneva Conventions and handling of “terrorists,” there are two problems.

    1. From Article 2: “The Conventions apply to a signatory nation even if the opposing nation is not a signatory, but only if the opposing nation ‘accepts and applies the provisions’ of the Conventions.” Since the US’ enemies (Taliban, al Queida, et al) do not accept and apply the provisions, we are not obligated to follow the conventions.

    2. From Article 5: “After a ‘competent tribunal’ has determined that an individual detainee is an unlawful combatant, the ‘detaining power’ may choose to accord the detained unlawful combatant the rights and privileges of a prisoner of war as described in the Third Geneva Convention, but is not required to do so.”

    Of course, all of this is moot, since the Geneva Conventions only apply to a state of war between two sovereign nations. They were adopted in 1949, and we haven’t been in a “state of war” since 1945.

    1. Frank L. Speaking says:

      The situation is complexified in that al Qaeda and the Taliban are not nation states.

  59. Hank says:

    Endless illegal searches, yet another violation of our rights. The gov’t constantly violates our rights.

    They violate the 1st Amendment by caging protesters and banning books like “America Deceived II”.

    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by allowing TSA to grope you.

    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars.

    Impeach Obama, support Ron Paul.

    Last link of “America Deceived II” before it is completely banned:


    1. Frank L. Speaking says:

      “They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars.” There are now 26,700 hits for that exact wording. Good job pimping whatever you’re pimping, Hank.

  60. Wrol1776 says:

    Any court or judge or president or congress or senate that is in obvious contradiction to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights should be immediately removed from office, position, etc. and placed in prison to await trail for treason. Any ignorant Pigs (pansy’s wearing uniforms and badges) that enforce this illegal and therefore invalid ruling are to be considered your enemy and a threat to your personal safety.

    Fight back America, and tell this communazi’s to go to he-ll.

    1. Frank L. Speaking says:

      Ummm, you’d be violating the Bill of Rights if you did what you say.

  61. Karieth says:

    So if I get pulled over for let’s say speeding the police can check my cell phonr? If I am walking down the street and like happens so many times a police officer wants to see my id he can just check my cell phone? What do either of these minor things have to do with saving someones life ?

    1. 1marg says:

      You don’t even have to be speeding. We were stopped at a DUI checkpoint. It was obvious we were not impaired, but the driver still had to produce his “papers.” This happened to every car in the long line waiting in line.

      What stops the police from taking your phone at that time? What stops them from taking the phones of everyone in the car? What stops them from telling any or all of the occupants that they have to go with the police?

      Nothing. We now live in a police state. Hope the fluking liberals are happy.

  62. George Davey says:

    This is an Obamanation of the 4th amendment.

  63. Chuck Pelto says:

    TO All
    RE: Another Example of the Fascist State….

    ….as imposed by Men In Black.

    The courts no longer observe the Constitution of the United States.

    I’m reminded of Benjamin Franklin’s famous truism….

    Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
    If this goes to the Supremes and THEY agree with this court, the system is now official broken.


    [Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. — Abraham Lincoln]

    1. ItsOver says:

      Great post!

  64. Policefromhell says:

    We are doomed to the police state life. It’s certain that we have become the sheeple. Only God almighty can show us mercy and give us freedom again when Jesus Christ returns.

  65. Policefromhell says:

    We are doomed to the police state life. It’s certain that we have become the sheeple. Only God almighty can show us mercy and give us freedom again when Jesus Christ returns.

  66. TW says:

    Judge Posner has also opined that you forfiet the right to all gold crowns/caps when you board the train to the the labor camp – these must be surrendered to the authorities upon embarcation!

    However, do not be concerned…you are strictly going for delousing.

  67. Jeff says:

    Courts uphold the law. If the law allows warrantless cell phone searches, then they should uphold that. Change the law, not the court.

    1. LibertyForMe says:

      Try again. The highest law in this land is the Constitution, which does not allow warrantless cell phone searches. No law needs to be changed, but there is a judge that needs to go.

  68. hebgb says:

    …”the ruling an invasion of privacy that far outweighs the needs of law enforcement”…What a revelation. It comes from the most liberal court in the land – who would have thoguht they’d give a hoot about civil liberties?

  69. SILENCER says:

    You had better get your heads around the idea that the Homeland Security apparatus is pointed at us, not the Scary Turban People. If there really was a terror threat from The Scary Turban People, the borders would be maintained and something by now would have happened after all the people that have been slaughtered in the middle east. This is how Police States are set up–the establishment creates a fake threat-propped up by staged events–that scares the bejesus out of everyone into giving up their rights under the alleged guise of “safety”.

    Next thing you know you’re herded into microwave ovens at the airport, groped in the pants by C student flunkies, your children, hopped up on violent video games that have desensitized them to killing other humans, are shipped off to war. Our once egalitarian and industrial nation has been looted to finance and forward the hegemony of the morally corrupt power elite, and this is what we get out of it.

    Fastest way out of the matrix is to unsubscribe from your cable or satellite TV service. Realize that the left/right political game we are sold is a front for the oligarchs that control both sides. Humanity is at a serious crossroads, and it’s time to get red-blooded and stand on our hind legs an snarl right back at the New World Order snake that threatens to swallow us all.


    1. Frank L. Speaking says:

      But but but — if I didn’t have cable, I’d lose my high-speed Internet access. How could I live without it?

  70. Frank L. Speaking says:

    Wow. Went away for an hour ago when only four comments had been posted.

    Posner’s ruling about accessing information in cell phones is consistent with what he wrote in 2002: “If torture is the only means of obtaining the information necessary to prevent the detonation of a nuclear bomb in Times Square, torture should be used — and will be used — to obtain the information. . . . No one who doubts that this is the case should be in a position of responsibility.”

    He also supports “the creation of a law barring hyperlinks or paraphrasing of copyrighted material.” Those positions would probably have more of an effect on me than any of his other controversial positions — such as legalization of LSD and marijuana.

  71. Skippy says:

    And deh fekin cops will do a “search” on a cell phone to wipe clean the audio or video recording you’ve been making of the exchange between you and de fekkin coppers…oopsies. all gone. so sorry.

    Posner is too old and too academic to grasp the issues. Park his ass in the Bronx for a week before he gets to hear another case.

    1. Frank L. Speaking says:

      All right. That one sailed over my head. Posner was born in New York City, but he’s on the bench in Chicago. Could you elaborate?

      1. Skippy says:

        Put him where he doesn’t know anybody and doesn’t do business. A little shock therapy for hizzonor. I’m sure he’d blog about it.

  72. whoeveriwant2b says:

    The water in the frog pot just went up another degree.

  73. NYS Parkie says:

    This is one heck of a slippery slope that just keeps on gettin more slippery. When will they be allowed to open my sealed mail without a warrant? My Gosh. We are certainly living in Hitler Like times now. Der Feuher in Chief wants us all to march in Goose Step with him.

  74. captain obvious says:

    somebody go create secure cell phone storage, you’ll be an overnight millionaire

  75. ReadyToRevoltByForce says:

    Judges are nothing but filthy lawyers in black robes who are ignorant about our constitutional protections against their Police State illegal searches.

  76. US Constitution says:

    The last time I checked in order to do a remote wipe of a phone, the phone ion questions has to be powered on or connected to a mobile network right? THere is no way SCOTUS allows this to stand.

  77. Gerald Jennings says:

    The mistake was basic and fatal, and it happened early in our history; the other branches of the Federal Government should never have allowed Marbury v Madison to stand…

  78. Ian says:

    A slippery slope indeed. Do you suppose government will abuse this un-Constitutional abomination?

    Think “Patriot Act” with over 200 THOUSAND warrantless searches.

  79. Ian says:

    BTW welcome to the tyranny we call Corporatocracy.

    You get what you vote for people.

  80. DJH says:

    It’s only a matter of time before some halfwit judge decides the police and ‘the state’ have an overbearing need to be able to conduct searches of your home and property, without warrant, using the same idiotic justification that was used here.

    1. Dead Letter says:

      They already have, effectively. You will recall the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that a homeowner has no right to resist policy entry into their homes EVEN when the police action is unlawful.

  81. Daniel Dover says:

    I’m sure if our law enforcement system feels it’s okay to search our cell phones without a warrant, they won’t mind if we search theirs. I mean, what do they have to hide, right?

    1. Alex says:


  82. 1marg says:

    I am getting closer to voting for Ron Paul. I mean, seriously, does anyone pay else attention to the Constitution any longer?

    ABO just isn’t a strong enough reason to vote for a politician who doesn’t respect my rights.

    1. rick says:


    2. 1marg says:

      I make so many errors in typing that I wish there was an “edit” feature.

      To quote this president (only I mean it) sorry, for the errors.

  83. JP4Paul says:

    Set a password on your phone to unlock it. It’s already been ruled on in a similar case involving an encryption key…you aren’t required to provide the key. I would hope the same would hold true. And regardless, 10 invalid attempts and the phone is wiped clean. Good luck with that, officer.

  84. rick says:

    It’s called a go phone bought at Target..Go get one and have the phone encrypted.
    Encrypt your computers too if your worried about your fading right to privacy. You lost the freedom of speech already might as well thwart them even if your 96 yrs old

  85. Alex says:

    Listen to Rule of Law Radio – this comes as no surprise.


  86. FSherman says:

    Just password protect your phone. Passwords are considered intellectual property, so you can’t be compelled to provide it with anything less than a court order.

  87. Jack P says:

    Hmmmmmmmmmmm! I wonder what you people who are against this ruling would say if your child was abducted and the situation cried out for a search w/o a warrant? Just askin. Not saying I’m for or against the ruling.

    1. FSherman says:

      I’d say the ends do not justify the means and that you can’t give up liberty all the time for the rare cases when it would be convenient. Those who are willing to give up liberty for security deserve neither.

  88. Jeff D. says:

    Your papers, please, Comrade?

  89. mrrationalhbg says:

    Next they’ll be searching all of our phones at DUI checkpoints.

  90. 1marg says:

    I am a law-abiding American citizen. In fact, I may be the most boring person in the country. It’s not for me that I fight these violations of our Constitution.

    Every time this government does something, we should always ask ourselves: What is the worst that can happen?

    As a conservative Christian, I am paying very close attention to obama, the way Jews should have paid Hit ler more attention when he began to gain power. I have not forgotten that obama said he would side with the Muslims.

    To those who are paying attention, and putting the puzzle pieces together, this is some pretty scary stuff.

    1. N says:

      A Republican-appointed judge on a Republican dominated Court (7-3) rules on something and this is about Obama how? This connects to Hitler how? You need psychological help and should look up some basic facts before going into Obama hate mode.

  91. Ryan says:

    Under the fourth amendment your phones can’t be searched unless the police have a warrant which says they have a good reason to search it. So, this is completely unconstitutional. It can also be used for blackmailing you if the police find something embarrassing or illegal on your phone.

  92. ziegler says:

    encrypt and password protect your phone. There are plenty of apps to do that. Then they cant access it all wihtout your consent or some forensics back at the police station. But you’ll get the pleasure of telling the police officer to take a flying leap and to waste some valuable resources and taxpayer money to get access to your private information.
    I like that they cant tap your phone without a judge but they can search your phone wihtout one…oh wait….thanks Mr Bush, you gave them permission to tap our phone wthout our consent too…..this country deserve the hell it is getting ready to go through.

  93. J says:

    God save us.

  94. Rudey says:

    I guess the best selling phones from here out will be the ones with the best encryption and password protection.

  95. Todd Boccabello says:

    I’m sorry. If you are under arrest and your phone is in your car………. it can be searched. If you get pulled over for speeding and the cop asks to “Take a look inside the vehicle” Tell him you’ll wait for the warrant. But if you’re locked up for dealing dope or anything else then everything in your possession at that time is subject to search. If you get nabbed for DUI and have kiddy porn on your Droid or in your back seat then it’s bye bye!! This doesn’t seem to be that big of deal to me. Plus you should be scrubbing your phone on the regs regardless of your criminmal disposition.

    1. Dave says:

      Never heard of “search incident to a valid arrest”, have we? There *are* instances where a warrant isn’t needed. Go ahead and tell them you’ll wait.

  96. C9328##321 says:

    Instead of moaning and groaning with posts we all need to light up the switchboard at the courthouse. They will never read these posts but they might get the message if they hear it in their ears, or e-mail messages. It won’t change Posner’s ruling but it will sure let them know in a hurry what we think of it!!

  97. e says:

    I would like to see them try, when its encrypted

    1. Dave says:

      You think encryption can’t be broken? Think again.

      1. Dave says:

        They’ll just seize your phone.

  98. dan says:

    The drug dealers will just figure out a way to delete/ destroy everything quickly.

    1. gk1 says:

      You don’t get it, Dan. This is for YOU TOO.

  99. Mike says:

    That’s why it’s called the “Jewdicial” system!

  100. StandUp4Yourself says:

    Folks. Just put a password with permanent erase feature on your cell phones. If you have an iPhone it’s built in. If you have an Android phone purchase or get a free app with this feature. You are not obligated to give your password away. Gee officer, I forgot it. My 5 year old must have set that up. Sorry…

    1. malcom says:

      there are portable machines that they hook up to your phone and it downloads all the information. Passwords don’t even matter. sadly.

  101. BFoley says:

    …but parents can’t. Go figure. Dig up Orwell and tell him we owe him a Pulitzer

  102. Mike says:

    Just Americans sticking it to other Americans because the ones getting it stuck to do nothing about it!

  103. TheGhettoLibertarian says:

    There is no sanctuary from government intrusion any longer.


  104. Jay says:

    I guess your opinion depends on whether or not you think people should be secure in their persons and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

  105. nick says:

    Posner is a known idiot and is reversed time and time again

    cell phone records exist in main office!

  106. stoptouchingthatmabel says:

    A matter of urgency, arguing it was possible for an accomplice to wipe the phone clean using a computer or other remote device, so we have to believe that because of this one in a billion scenario might be possible we all now have that freedom taken from us. What other might be possible fantasies could this court think of to steal more of our individual freedoms? This ruling can’t possibly stand; it stretches the power of the police too far on flimsy reasoning of what could be possible.

  107. malcom says:

    Hitler, Mao and Stalin would be proud of obama today’s democrat party, I don’t know who is worse the East German police or the police in the united States. You are only fooling yourself if you think America is free.. Just think of how many police officers today get away with murdering civillians? most are unarmed. Think about how liberals are pushing laws and that if you don’t agree with the liberal agenda you will go to prison. HItler was the same when it came to pushing his NAZI laws. America is dead and if the polioticans don’t have to obey laws and blacks and illegals don’t either only White conservatives do , then America is DEAD as we know it.

  108. bertaggle says:

    doesn’t bother me at all. i’ve got nothing to hide just like my grandfather didn’t…you know my grandfather… the one with the number tattooed on his forearm!!!

  109. kess says:


  110. darel says:

    The judge should be recalled!

  111. Locutisprime says:

    Another example of a lower court ruling that will be overturned by the supreme court once it finally reaches there. The 4th amendment is pretty specific in it’s protection of people’s property and the 7th district cannot disregard that in order to create an interpretation out of thin air.

  112. LizardLips says:

    Even if the police use ‘exigence’ as probable cause they must still swear out an affidavit for a warrant, post facto. Just get an old cell phone and keep it handy.

  113. qaz says:

    > The judge in the appeal case, Judge Richard Posner, agreed that the officer had > to search the phone immediately or risk losing valuable evidence.
    You take the battery out of the phone, get a warrant, take the memory out of the phone, plug the memory into an adapter and plug it into a computer. What’s the rush?

  114. rtruth says:

    Hey Dumb @$$es…. Dont Break the law and you wont have anything to worry about!!!!!!

    1. BFoley says:

      If sheep could talk… this is what they’d say

      >>>(rtruth) Hey Dumb @$$es…. Dont Break the law and you wont have anything to worry about!!!!!!

    2. ItsOver says:

      Its not about breaking the law. Its about FREEDOM and LIBERTY.

    3. Sterling Headset says:

      Pigs and Sows break the law every day. Swine loves to wallow in slop, that’s the environment they’ve chosen for themselves. The best approach is to outsmart these barnyard animals and do it at every turn. I work with all of my friends to strip police of their power on every front. It’s Constitutional and I enjoy doing it.

  115. RDFinOP says:

    I think Judge Posner didn’t have good advice. The officer could have simply removed the battery and impounded it pending a warrent. The officer could also have put the phone in a ‘Faraday cage’ which would not allow it to transmit or receive. I’m not an expert but I would imagine that simply wrapping it in aluminum foil would have sufficed. Removing the battery would have been best.

  116. RDFinOP says:

    To those of you who are blaming the current president for this, think again. Judge Posner was a Reagan appointee. In any case, once appointed, the separation of powers means that the sitting president has little or no influence over what happens in the judiciary.

  117. Denis Drew says:


    Are these judges from the 19th century?

  118. policestate says:

    In California we have had several rogue officers caught on cellphone cameras. Thank goodness we did because the officers lied. They sometimes demanded the phones so that they could erase the footage. Will they now have the authority to demand the phone? (Kelly Thomas beating death, homeless special needs woman punched on bus and officer threatens the veteran who is simply filming. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_JhlTifFzU&feature=related

    1. matt says:

      Yep… Same in VA. No matter what the situation. If a cop here spots you with a phone they will take it. It is time for people to stand up to this. We have to get the liberals out.

  119. bobdudley says:

    good luck tryiing to search my cell phone. Or, anything else in my possession without a warrent.

  120. Voice says:

    Nothing to see here People,move along.

  121. CK says:

    The copy of the Constitution that I have makes no mention of the risk of losing information in the Fourth Amendment.

    Perhaps Judge Posner is using a different version.

  122. matt says:

    Lets do a head count….. Who here voted for him?

    1. Marc says:

      not me. I say blow him away.

  123. JAIP says:

    I encourage everyone to read up on Writs of Assistance.

  124. jilly says:

    Hal Jordan said…
    “Absolutely it was reasonable. If you are arrested, everything you have in your possession is now available for the police to search. Solution: don’t do anything that will get you arrested, and they can’t search your phone.”

    Hal, that’s the dummest advice anyone has ever heard. Just wait until some cop gets caught with porn on his cell phone or computer without a warrant, see just how quick he resorst back to 4TH Amendment and his “rights!”

    Hell! In today’s America POLICE STATES one can be arrested for sitting idle on a Park bench too long. Those “oppressive” countries America to to war with for being “oppressive” really don’t look all that “oppressive” after all when compared to America’s oppressing of its own citzens, does it?

  125. Sterling Headset says:

    Exercise your right to keep and bear arms. There may come a time in the near future where it is necessary to defend yourself against tyrannical Legislative, Judicial and Executive branches of the government. It is now and always has been the prerogative of law enforcement officers to gain as much access and control over your lives as they can. If you don’t stop them cold in their tracks, they’ll never cease their quest to control every aspect of your lives. Exercise your right to keep and bear arms, the government is not your friend.

    1. DMAC says:

      The real reason the forefathers gave us the 2nd amendment was so we could protect ourselves from a tyrranist government. They knew one day the government would get out of control, all government have.

  126. Crosscut says:


  127. Jack Kinch(1uncle) says:

    This would be good if everyone was perfect but then we wouldn’t need it. So, it amounts to one more less freedom.

  128. DMAC says:

    Today ones compuer is the equivalent of a file drawer filled with paersonal papers. Todays phones are no different than out computers as some of todays phones have more power than the computers we used just 5 years ago. This ruling should be overturned. If you arrest me out on the street for anything, it does not give the police the right to go into my house and search through my files. It does not matter if my files are in my house or in my phone, its all the same, they are MY files and you need a warrant to look at them.
    If I’m arrested for selling drugs, not tried and convicted, just arrested, then what purpose does having my personal records have? It has no bearing. The reason the police want the phone records is to try and build a case against those people in the contacts list, suppliers and customers. Whom one sells to and whom one buys from is a seperate issue from the act of selling. The act of selling would only pertain to the person who made the sell and the person who made the buy, not those suspected of selling or buying in ones contact list. This is overeach.
    While the courts look at that one, they shgould also look at how some states feel they can draw blood from your body without your permission to see if you are under the influence of drugs ar alcohol. I have a right not to incriminate my self so isn’t htis act also illegal for the government to do? I say it is.

  129. Mark Matis says:

    Time for dead pigs.

    1. Phyllis D Anderson says:

      And Judges!

      1. Mark Matis says:


  130. Daniel says:

    didnt the offender already get busted for dope, and therefore the officer had probable cause to search without a warrant?

    1. unkajed says:

      Please help me…I can not find the words “Probable Cause” in the Constitution. Couple you please point them out to me?

      1. Mark Matis says:

        He is too occupied enjoying his filtered coffee and donuts to be able to do that. Not that he cares about the Constitution any more than his pig buddies do. Their oath is a meaningless mere formality to them

  131. Why Not Have Fun! says:

    It is in direct opposition to the Constitution – Marbury vs Madison; Any law repugnant to the Constitution is NOT A LAW and need not be obeyed.

    Resist – Refuse, Reload

  132. unkajed says:

    Ha! Search this!!!

  133. Patriot Act of Infringing on the Bill of Rights says:

    Anybody read Susan Linauer’s EXTREME PREJUDICE? That’ll send shivers up your spine!!

    1. Patriot Act of Infringing on the Bill of Rights says:

      Make that Lindauer

  134. rlroll2 says:

    There is no way on earth the Supreme Court or even a full sitting of the Seventh Circuit will uphold this. Judge Posner’s got to be a ‘tyranny tiger’ from the left wing. Noone else would make such a ridiculous ruling.

  135. GregoTX says:

    This is just the beginning if Obama gets another term. We’ve got to get him out of there if there is any hope of hanging on to any semblance of America as envisioned by our Founding Fathers. If Comrade Obama gets another term, chances are good the USSC and (the rest of the) appellate courts tilt liberal, and we’re gonna have a whole lot more rulings like this and Wickard.

  136. Angelo Quintara says:

    What m o r o n actually stores sensitive and personal data on a device that can be so easily stolen? Surely if they do they destroy the data once a week or so right?

    Oh sorry m o r o n s , didn’t mean to call you out.

  137. bugdog says:

    This is insane and it needs to addressed imeadiatly! Are we going to stand by and allow these dictators/liberals to dominate every single facet of our lives?

  138. tom smithwick says:

    More incentive’s for non-cooperation with the enforcers of government “law.” Because our ‘state’ has lost its way, the actual code of conduct for inter-human relations is, commit no acts of aggresion to a person or the property that the person claims. Everything else is piracy by another name.

  139. klazzee says:

    Please help me…I can not find the words “Probable Cause” in the Constitution. Couple you please point them out to me?

    unkajed, “Probable Cause” is just a jacked-up, made up term law enforcement came up with to violate the rights of American citizens, pretending it’s all for the safety of them and the public. The truth is, on an average day, cops are committing more crimes than the citizens they arrest. Go to any website that monitors cop behavior and you’ll find child molesters, rapists, cops charged with statuatory rape, murderers, drug addicts, alcholics caught DUI, DWI, extortionists in uniform and protected by their local police dept. The same crimes the average citizens gets locked away for years committin, cops get placed on leave “with pay.” They’re rarely fired, and even more rare to go to trial. And even rarer to be convicted if they do go to trial. These are the type individuals serving and protecting the public nowadays. They’re your school resource officers, preying on little girls and boys, but they’re rarely held to the same standards when caught as the rest of us would be

  140. Phyllis D Anderson says:

    This is why we should kill All judges!!!

  141. GreyGeek says:

    RICO was to be used “only” against organized crime.
    National Security Letters only against terrorists.
    The PATRIOT Act only against terrorists.
    The TSA was to prevent terrorists from boarding planes with bombs.

    Now, RICO is used 10,000+ times a year against ordinary citizens, and its “guilty property” provision supplements many police department buggets.

    LIBRARIES received NSL’s!!! And, the PATRIOT act’s primary purpose seems to be as an eraser to the Bill of Rights.

    The TSA is branching out to interstates, highways, bus stations and city streets with their random searchers. Soon it will be “show us your papers” at the point of a gun.

    This warrentless search authorization was approved on the premise that the bad guy might erase encriminating evidence, but it will morph into fishing expeditions seeking encriminating evidece in the absence of any evidence of wrong doing.

    The Constitution is essentially dead.

  142. Burl says:

    Ever notice it’s always “for your own good”? As they go about their wholesale agenda of stripping Americans of liberty, it’s invariably “for your own good.

    These slimy anti-constitutional ruling-class bureaucrats would rape you with a rusty pipe and chime in with how “it’s for your protection.” And the mainstream media would stand there and act puzzled, and would slant their coverage to ostensibly weigh in favor of the authoritarian bureaucrats.

    And some people actually believe these anti-constitutional corrupt thugs are benevolent and wise; heck, some people actually believe what they’re fed at HuffPo or the lame Nightly News. They’re generally Democrat voters.

  143. Alex says:

    To hell with all these paranoid judges and cops! If you don’t have a properly executed warrant too bad! There’s not a weapon in a cell phone anyway and as a former peace officer, I resen turing police into militarized thugs.

  144. unkajed_crazy says:

    The only thing that will work is the same thing Gandhi and India did.


    Like it was stated…They can not put us all in jail.

    My Country Tis of Thee? Sweet Land of Liberty? Where the hell did you go?

    Ufff… Just shoot me now.

  145. Rawn Pawl says:

    Yup, line crossed. America, Communism. Communism, America. Become acquainted, because this is what you get for voting Democrat.

  146. Constitution says:

    I bet that Judge can’t spell Constitution. They won’t be reading my phone. This govt. is out of control and has been for decades…. That whenever any form of Govt. becomes destructive of these ends, IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to ABOLISH IT.

  147. Russ in OR says:

    The old ‘a child has been kidnapped and is in imminent danger’ rationalization makes me gag! First, it can be used to rationalize ANY police overreach. Second, this dope slinger didn’t kidnap anyone, did he? A real police department could arrest this guy using good police work without trampling our rights.

  148. Sara Cofresi says:

    A travesty!!! I am thinking about writing down the names of people who, in government, make silly decisions only because I am too old to trust my memory anymore. I really only want to remember the names of the people that helped in the destruction of America if I am granted a few more days

  149. Jim says:

    Great! Now maybe we can take out some of the drug zombies who try to sell to our children!

  150. Jack Lee says:

    There is NFW this is legal if you check the Constitution. These Judges should be impeached!

    1. Mark Matis says:

      As if THAT is going to happen. The only way to remove them is to kill them. And to get to them, you’ll have to go through their pig enablers first…

  151. dave says:

    people we are losing our rights more each day, when do we take our country back?????????????

  152. Chester Molestor says:

    Why not?

    TSA performs warrantless searches on your anatomical orifices…

    1. mark says:

      Yes, but you agree to it in order to fly. You also agree to the search of your purchases at COSTCO per their member agreement…I never agreed to allow an officer to pilfer my phone info to be a citizen!

  153. Distressed Seven says:

    Don’t worry. Most of the vaunted web and its close cousins, cells, blackberries, Iphones will be toast as the sun takes out the grid and the increase of power outages and fast fried chicken technology takes a bow. We are all coming into an epoch of sudden quickening and the COPS may end up being more insane but much more impotent than they ever were. It’s all junk anyway. Enjoy…the best is yet to come.

  154. Ace says:

    Not Cool. Not Cool.
    That is a clear and unlawful invasion of privacy.

  155. Richard M says:

    I was pulled over about three years ago in Klamath Falls Oregon by a State Trooper. I was pulled over for speeding, had more money on me then they thought I should, and searched my phone without my permission. I was 29 at the time, and they used MY PHONE to call my parents to check my story, assuming my parents whom I didn’t live with would be able to help them. I have no criminal record!! eventually they let me go with even a citation and I went down to Mt Shasta, CA for my friends wedding. I filed a complaint which resulted in nothing. NOTHING!!

    1. mark says:

      Your papers must have been out of order!

  156. maxine howard says:

    So, basically any new videos we take of the police abusing citizens, such as pistol whipping, and such.They can just confiscate and delete. Get rid of all evidence, make sure they will never be held accountable. Wow, you judges are such great Americans. Man this country sure ain’t what it use to be.What a awful country I live in.I know there are even worse, but I have no pride in this one either.

    1. Hal Jordan says:

      How do you come to that conclusion from reading the original story?

      I blame the American education system.

      1. Sharingnews says:

        Are you serious? The first ruling that stepped us toward corporations having human rights was in 1814.

        I’d say his education has done him well. It’s called looking into the future. One corrupt ruling leads to another. It’s called Judicial Activism.

  157. mark says:

    Leave my 4th Amendment alone! Let police find their evidence another way besides rummaging through every phone they think is suspect.

  158. miranda says:

    I read more about this ruling because it bothered me so. The lawyers defending the search said it possible for unknown party to delete the information on the cell phone. The court agreed but then stated that the the chances of that happening were not probable. It also said the police were just looking for the cell phone number. Couldn’t they use that phone to call another phone to capture the number? I looked all over my phone and I cannot find my cell phone number. But by looking for it, I went through my address book and texts. It’s not just bad that the ruling violates the 4th amendment but it does so with so a such a bad argument.

  159. NotBob says:

    Please help me spread the word about these abusers with severe mental health issues. Their story involving “To Train Up A Child” in a nutshell is below. Please feel free to copy and paste it elsewhere on the web.

    After a serious report of child abuse was made by numerous people against Danielle and Curtis Kekoa III, they are once again promoting their use of the abusive principals taught by Michael and Debi Pearl in the book “To Train up a Child”

    Their website:

    It took Social Services several weeks to actually investigate the report, giving the Kekoas plenty of time to cover up whatever might have been going on.

    Now Dani Kekoa claims that Social Services commends them for using the abusive tactics taught by the Pearls. The Pearls openly encourage “discipline”, as early as 6 months old, “Whippings” with the “rod” as they call them are ineffective unless it causes pain. The Pearls teach how to “Whip” in such a way that it causes pain but doesn’t leave any marks so that the “government” can’t prove the abuse. Someone needs to stop these abusers.

    Obviously Adams County Colorado doesn’t take child abuse seriously NOR substance exposed newborns given Dani Kekoa’s self admitted marijuana usage throughout her pregnancy. Apparently Colorado Social Services also doesn’t feel it necessary to examine ALL 6 children during an investigation, in particular the youngest two who are the most venerable and the potentially substance exposed newborn.

    Also alarming is that these children aren’t registered with any school district, aren’t involved with any church or social groups, or extra curricular activities and therefore have no visibility in the community. Outside contact of any kind is strictly prohibited. Social services is aware of all of this and did nothing. We wonder how children die. Let’s be proactive instead reactive when a child is in imminent danger.

    Call Adams County Colorado Department of Human Services and tell them to reopen the case! (303) 287-8831

  160. Sharingnews says:

    “Ooooops, officer, I was just on my way to the phone store, I spilled coffee on it.”

    -Holds up still sopping wet phone for him to see.

  161. Mark Matis says:

    Two thoughts: Password-protect your phone, and turn it off when stopped. And DON’T use the default password. Or smash the phone rather than letting them have it. Of course, the pigs are only TOO glad to make sure your cell phone is unable to record their treason.

  162. robster says:

    Just encrypt your phone. Recent court ruling states you can’t be forced to unlock a computer hard drive because it is considered an act of self incrimination, testifying against yourself. I’m sure phone messages would be protected the same way.

    1. docpsych34 says:

      Good advice.

  163. Lance says:

    Old judge appointed by Reagan? Probably doesn;t even own a cell phone.

  164. Travis says:

    Welcome to osama’s United States. He promised “CHANGE”, this is it. A country with no border, where legal citizens are treated like prison inmates and the red carpet is rolled out for any Mexican, South or Central American that wants to come here for free government handouts (jobs, foodstamps, healthcare, housing, transportation even an American’s Identity). All the while Americans are being told to shut up – being labeled “racist” for standing up against these criminals and their supporters (liberals, LaRaza, MeCha and other racist organizations).

  165. Rip Brown says:

    I beleive the only time an officer should have the right to look at someone cell phone is when their involved in an traffic accident. I beleive there are more accidents due to cell phone use.

  166. Thomas T says:

    So… you can now be pulled over for glancing down (anti-texting laws) and have your cell phone searched

    But we arent losing any of our basic rights?

  167. Vanmind says:

    I was sceptical, but once the bureaucrat mentioned “saving the children” I realized that the problem is mine and that I must start being a more obedient citizen.

  168. josetoyou says:

    If you don’t own a gun, buy one and get lots of ammo.
    The day is comming when we will have to use them to restore our nation,

  169. Charles Durham says:

    They need to take it all the way to the Supreme Court. This still violates the 4th Amendment.

  170. Rick Carufel says:

    Our constitutional rights are being eroded incrementally day by day. Police searches of cell phone history, without probable cause and a search warrant directly violates the the 5th amendment. These Fascist judges are in for life so the only way they will be gotten ride of is when they die.

  171. Donna S. says:

    Wow! Does that ruling also mean that if I am pulled over for any reason I have a right to demand to search through the Officer’s cellphone also if I place him under a Citizen’s Arrest?

  172. Donnel Fenton says:

    (1)In 1975 US Sup Crt ruled Judicial immunities for any wrong doing and anyone
    the judge(s)make immune(prosecutors/investigators)This has led to no warrant
    arrests w/no bail. Once rare-see online 10-15 arrests per month. They can
    now frame you with false evidence/testimony w/immunity! (2)Sup Crt
    rules corporations can donate any amount(to buy/to own)$$ to polticians.
    (3)The patriot Act-ability to watch YOU/arrest YOU and now they say they can
    kill American citizens within our country—MUTE yourself (4) US Sup Crt rules
    for forced arbitration(careful of those contracts you sign)—Never give up
    your constitutional rights–full or part time. It means due process is up to the
    judge–you know the immune one. (5) gas prices rising—the war profiteers want war(Iran)now! When it hits an artificial amount of $6.00 will you then
    OK another war. Polish up your children to die for the war profiteers.(6)
    Ron Paul wants constitution adheard to–citizens say we too, but they will not
    acknowledge him or vote for him—why? because the media does not like
    him the politicians feel he in the way. Can you hear the chant from the Neocons,
    the constitution is outdated do not need, the politicians, courts, judges will decide
    whats best for YOU. We are in an era of wrong is right and the groupie
    voters(Demos/Repubs) will vote all the politicians back in

  173. JOSE0311USMC says:


    1. ItsOver says:

      This gov has taken the best of all tyrants and packaged it up just for us….yeehhaaaw The best part is how easy it is and how little fight we put up.


    What do you mean the police NOW have the right to search cell phones when

    In Brownwood,TX that has been going on for years and years. Even to the point of once an inmate was in his cell. The task force fella in Brown County and also another deputy in the Sheriffs office, would go to the inmates personal belongings,remove their cell phone and have access to everyone the inmate had called. Then the Task force fella would go to the local Cell phone company and be allowed into the room where thousands of cell phone calls were kept and cross reference all the phone numbers on cell phones and track down who all anyone was calling. People kept getting out of jail and then a friend would be arrested. 3 different groups of people were arrested. No warrant was obtained and a deceased ex district attorney advised no warrants were ever asked for. So i find it pretty interesting
    that it is just now being approved. The task force fella even knew how to enter
    his own cell phone number into the cell phone of the arrested and not yet
    bonded inmate and when that prisoner was released, his phone was returned
    and anyone who called the bonded person, it automatically triggered the task force fella’s phone. Yep, been going on here in Brownwood for years. Nothing
    new it just seems strange that no attorney for anyone arrested would defend
    their clients, If someone got arrested and jailed, that same task force fella even had the nerve to get the prisoner out of their jail cell when he could not find their SIM card to ask them where their SIM card was. Threatened to add
    10 years onto a prison sentence or other threats if the SIM Card was not produced.

  175. DKNOLA says:

    Wasn’t this rules unconstitutional just a few months ago by the FEDs ??? So how can a Federal District Court over rule the DOJ???

    And what is it with this “24” mentality? If we water board them and take away ALL their civil rights we’ll get what we need…. What a crock.

    This country has so lost it’s way we might as well be called the CCSA. Time to leave.

  176. StreekyD says:

    Where is the out cry from the left??
    Where is Cindy Sheehan?
    Where is Code Pink?

Comments are closed.

More From CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

Drip Pan: CBS Local App
Drip Pan: Weather App

Watch & Listen LIVE