GPS Tracking Devices, Technology & Privacy: U.S. v. Jones

Ongoing advances in modern technology consistently change the way we think about our privacy rights. The proliferation of the use of GPS tracking devices used by law enforcement officers and private citizens is no exception. While obviously beneficial for government agents to track suspects, these devices can also ease the fears of a parent of a teenage driver or a child of an elderly parent still navigating the roads. On the other hand, though less ethical, these devices can legally be used to track the movements of estranged spouses or to stalk others.

In an attempt to create some boundaries, the Supreme Court evaluated the constitutional limits on the use of these devices by law enforcement officers in the recent case of United States v. Jones, No. 10-1259 (U.S. Jan. 23, 2012).

In Jones, Defendant Antione Jones, the owner of a nightclub in D.C., came under the suspicion of law enforcement for trafficking narcotics. To track his activities, the Government applied for a warrant authorizing the use of an electronic tracking device on a car registered to his wife. The warrant was issued, giving the Government authority to install the device within 10 days. On the 11th day, officers installed the device on the car while parked in a public lot in Maryland. As a result, the device was installed without a proper warrant. Over the next 28 days, the Government used the device to track the vehicle resulting in more than 2,000 pages of data. The lower court suppressed the GPS data obtained while the vehicle was parked at Jones' residence; however, the remaining data was admissible, according to the court, because Jones had no reasonable expectation of privacy when the vehicle was on public streets. Jones was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.

The...