Crabby Blogging Lady

WHAT a CRAPPY reason to spy on people and (once again) break the presidential oath to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution.

Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous at best. On Friday, the first federal appeals court to consider the topic will hear oral arguments (PDF) in a case that could establish new standards for locating wireless devices.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in their–or at least their cell phones’–whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that “a customer’s Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records” that show where a mobile device placed and received calls.

You know, the prez doesn’t take an oath to protect the American people from terrorists; he doesn’t take an oath to protect is from ourselves, either. He takes an oath to

“….to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution

Is that such a difficult thing to do??

The legal question regarding the cell phone surveillance is: do the phone companies have the right to store in their databases our conversations, and give that information to the government? Well, so our conversations are not technically our own, is that it? It all comes down to who OWNS us and who owns our data, doesn’t it? Does this go the same way for the mail– the post office owns our mail, technically, because we use them to deliver it? Information seems to be the key here. You can’t BE a person without information. Information is property, isn’t it? Isn’t this what the Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights alludes to?

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.

I tell ya, folks, break out those tinfoil hats!