Search for: "Office of Information and Privacy"
Results 9561 - 9580
of 16,331
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jun 2014, 1:09 pm
And indeed, for the vast majority of the target, the information was not relevant to any crime. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 12:00 pm
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing the opinion on behalf of the Court, acknowledged both the individual’s right to privacy and the State’s need to investigate crime, but the decision came down strongly on the side of privacy rights. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 9:40 am
But even then, it ruled, those “exigent” exceptions to the requirement for a search warrant would have to satisfy a judge after the fact.The ruling was such a sweeping embrace of digital privacy that it even reached remotely stored private information that can be reached by a hand-held device — as in the modern-day data storage “cloud. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 8:02 am
Jones, Justice Sotomayor concurred and dropped the bombshell that “it may be necessary to reconsider the premise that an individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information voluntarily disclosed to third parties. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 7:53 am
Despite that a person’s public movements have generally been held to lack privacy protection, these Justices (in an opinion by Justice Alito) reasoned that expectations of privacy may change with technology and that continual GPS monitoring in itself could violate privacy rights by allowing police to track a person’s every whereabout over long stretches of time. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 12:30 am
Privacy comes at a cost.Individual rights and freedoms come at a cost too. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 8:49 pm
Must a police officer ignore this digital information? [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 8:49 pm
Must a police officer ignore this digital information? [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 8:48 pm
And, indeed, many people have just as much (or perhaps more) sensitive information on their phone as in their homes. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 7:37 pm
With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans 'the privacies of life.' The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 7:33 pm
With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans 'the privacies of life.' The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 4:42 pm
Looking first at the Riley case, the Court held cell phones contained private information which the police are not entitled to review merely incident to an arrest. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 3:50 pm
EPIC wrote, “Allowing police officers to search a person’s cell phone without a warrant following an arrest would be a substantial infringement on privacy, is unnecessary, and unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 2:25 pm
The Court acknowledged that its decision today would make it a little harder for police officers to do their jobs: “Privacy,” it conceded, “comes at a cost. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 1:54 pm
The court doesn’t seriously try to figure out how much people are really injured if a police officer looks at information on their cellphones. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 1:16 pm
” Each Justice obviously understood that when a police officer searches through the contents of a cell phone, they are able to look through an amazing amount of personal information, and that this information is unique. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 1:08 pm
[The Law Offices of Susan L. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 12:08 pm
Hartman agree with this SCOTUS decision, thus preserving Americans’ privacy interests in the digital data that is stored on cell phones. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 10:35 am
In response to the release of an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo, which authorized the drone strike on American Anwar al-Awlaki, two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Mark Udall (D-CO), have asked for more information on U.S. policy regarding targeted killings of Americans. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 10:24 am
He says that (1) he believes the rule allowing searches incident to arrest is much broader than people think it is (i.e., wasn't originally based on officer safety but on "the need to obtain probative evidence"—which I think would justify any search); and (2) he would be happy to reconsider the result in this case if legislators enacted laws that drew reasonable distinctions "based on categories of information "or perhaps other variables. [read post]
