Another significant 9-0 decision was handed down by the Court yesterday. They ruled unanimously that a warrant is required in order for the police to take and view your cell phone incident to detention and arrest.
I was surprised by that given that the Court also recently ruled that anybody arrested could also be strip searched. But I am happy that the Justices made the interpretation that the 4th amendment wording of "effects" also included cell phones. I was concerned that Thomas or Scalia might have taken the "originalist" view that as there were no cell phones in 1787, then the 4th amendment didn't apply.
I also saw the McCullen vs. Coakley decision came down. How can that be balanced with "free speech zones" that have become ubiquitous anytime someone is trying to protest at party national conventions or presidential speeches?
I guess we'll get the Hobby Lobby decision on Monday. That should be interesting...
"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." Winter is Coming Now this is the Law of the Jungle—as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk, the Law runneth forward and back; For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
But I am happy that the Justices made the interpretation that the 4th amendment wording of "effects" also included cell phones. I was concerned that Thomas or Scalia might have taken the "originalist" view that as there were no cell phones in 1787, then the 4th amendment didn't apply. 
