I enjoy watching the
Supremes. Realizing people might think I am talking about the singing ensemble
(that I do like), I feel I should clarify that I am talking about the Supreme
Court of the United States. It is a unique group and frankly, despite all the
pundits who predict their actions, I still tend to believe that you never
really know just what they might do.
Last week they surprised me,
pleasantly I might add, when they issued a joint ruling on Riley v California and UnitedStates v Wurie. These cases deal with the search of cell phones. Chief
Justice Roberts wrote the opinion for this ruling, with Associate Justice Alito
writing a concurring opinion.
The Court ruled, in a unanimous
vote, for the people and privacy, saying that barring exigent circumstances –
which must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the judge hearing the case –
information contained on a mobile phone cannot be viewed without a search
warrant. Roberts' opinion states, "Our cases have historically recognized that
the warrant requirement is 'an important working part of our machinery of
government,' not merely an inconvenience to be somehow 'weighed' against the
claims of police efficiency."