Wired: NSA Wrongly Says Warrantless Mobile-Phone Location Tracking Is Legal

So, the sixth circuit says that a warrant is not needed to get a subscriber’s geo-loc info. The Supreme Court let the ruling stand. Why is the NSA lawyer incorrect?

The fifth circuit says that something less than probable cause is insufficient to compel a phone company to disclose the records. What if you simply request them? No law requires the cell companies to not disclose the information, based upon a reasonable request or subpoena. How was the NSA lawyer wrong?

The third circuit says that a court may choose to require a warrant. (At least they’re not ambiguous about it.)

The fourth circuit is likely to rule in favor of government, as the article mentions the argument that the Stored Communication Act makes it legal.

So if you want to make claims that its illegal for government to acquire geo-location data, first write letters to congress and the Senate requesting that they take up the geo-location privacy act, or one of the myriad other similar bills, and actually pass something. Is it against the Fourth Amendment? I have a sneaking suspicion that the entire SCA is unconstitutional, but I’m no attorney, just someone who wishfully thinks that my “papers” should include those documents that I have entrusted to a 3rd party, like the US Postal Service, Federal Express, Yahoo and Gmail. Also the electronic records that others gather about me. But that is an example of wishful thinking, not the legal opinion of an attorney.