Fourth Amendment Compliance

George Rebane

FBI director James Comey complains that his bureau is having a hard time tracking home-grown raghead recruits because as soon as they get hyped up and contact an outfit like ISIS, they’re directed to get an encrypted smartphone for all subsequent communications with the jihadists.  And modern encryption techniques are so powerful that third parties, including the FBI and NSA, cannot decrypt their conversations.  So the government has been pushing the big tech companies to make all smartphones with a ‘back door’ for which government has the key.  The tech companies correctly point out that “there is no technical way to protect their users’ legitimate privacy with encryption while also enabling intelligence agencies and law enforcement to gain access to what terrorists plot online.”

So reports Gordon Crovitz in his 6jul15 ‘Why Terrorists Love Silicon Valley’.  However, there is a technical approach that would go a long way to satisfying the feds, but the tech companies have every reason to contest it on at least two grounds.  First, implementing the approach makes ‘cracking the code’ easier, and second, why allow demonstrably incompetent agencies of a technologically imbecile government to have access to their customers' information.  The probability approaches certainty that any data that feds can sniff from your private affairs will soon be in the hands of every bad guy in the world.  Over the last years it has become obvious to all but the most obtuse progressive, that the bad guys out there are at least as smart as our feds on their best day, a fact they now admit to almost daily.

But Director Comey argues his case for such a technological compromise on the basis of the Fourth Amendment that grants government the right to conduct “reasonable searches and seizures”, and this is my focus here.  Crovitz sides with Comey who one ups the Constitution by claiming that the Fourth then also “creates duties for responsible companies to be able to comply” - i.e. facilitate government searches and seizures.  However, this interpretation would require a reading of the Constitution similar to SCOTUS’ recent rewriting of the ACA providing subsidies to states without Obamacare exchanges – simply turn English on its head.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it state that private citizens must compromise their own security or privacy so as to make it easy for government to search and seize as permitted by the Fourth.  Government’s right to conduct legal and reasonable searches and seizures is totally independent (orthogonal) to the citizen’s right to secure his property and affairs.  There are no laws that require you to put weaker locks on your door so as to make it easier for government to bust in, even when they have a legal writ in their mitt.  The locks (and other security devices) on your property are purposely as stout as you can afford, and you put them there to keep out thieves.

The Constitution requires of no man that he consciously open himself to predation just to facilitate government’s ingress to his affairs.   That government may on occasion obtain and exercise its reasonable and legal right to search and seize what’s yours, by no means automatically implies that you then must at all times maintain your property and affairs in a compromised state that also makes such search and seizure more facile for criminals.

Comments

[Todd Juvinall]

Lojack is now in most cars. I don't think it is done with a person's permission.

[Bill Tozer]

My father, who retired as a cop with 600 officers under his command, told me I have to submit to a vehicle inspection, but I do not have to participate. This was after we went through one of those vehicle inspection checkpoints they used to set up on the road like DUI checkpoints in grandpa's old beat up pickup truck.
Dad responded to the young officer's request by firmly stating if you want to see if the wipers work, you turn them on. If my windshield gets scratched, you just bought me a new windshield and I will notify your department. Dad never flashed his badge or revealed his credentials wearing his torn shirts and fishing hat on his days off. He just knew the law and adhered to it.

Somehow I got this nagging feeling we have gone from submitting to Big Bro to participating in his schemes.

[joe smith]

Todd 07:59. What drives a person like you be a chronic and pathological liar? Why would you even suggest Lojack is on most cars and installed without the person's permission? What do you get out of telling lies like this? Lojac is a dealer and after market OPTION that only works when the BUYER registers the system. A few weeks ago Lojack stock dropped to a 52 week low of 2. The vast majority of cars do NOT carry Lojack. If they did, my portfolio would a bit more robust.

[Bonnie McGuire]

If our Federal gov is so worried about terrorists (bad guys) why has it put the welcome mat on our open southern border? And why did the state forced to protect itself get so much flack? And then there are the Feds and policemen searching and stealing people's money in bank accounts, cars and homes without warrants is illegal also. Amendment IV clearly states, "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."

[Jon]

Agree with most of your comments Bonnie. EXCEPT to note the conspicuous lack of a figurative welcome mat on the southern border. Where do you our US border agents waving on the illegal immigrants? There are more monitors and boder personnel than ever before down there. There is no current surge of illegal immigrants on the border. But with racist media hounds like Donald Trump spouting these lies, I can understand how one might get the wrong information.

[Todd Juvinall]

Bonnie you are spot on. Obama has pulled the ICE agents back, he has given orders to not force "Sanctuary cities" to work with the feds on these illegal immigrant scum murderers like Sanchez in SF. Obama should be impeached for thumbing his nose at Bill Clinton's signature legislation of 1996. Now we have a editorial from some dopey paper on Arizona complaining the "wall" is too high and those illegals are falling and breaking bones. And they get medical help from us! The world is mad!

[Don Bessee]

More giggles from the comic styling's of the 'jon' @ 338 lol

[Gregory]

Looking forward, it does appear a number of California pols may have picked up their own personal Willie Horton with the 'Frisco shooting. Maybe not for 2016, but adverts hitting Gavin Newsom in '18 will write themselves.

[Gregory]

The Frisco shooter had been deported a number of times, and got back in a number of times... does "Jon" really think a best effort to enforce immigration law is a feature of the current administration? The border seems as porous as ever.

What percentage of undocumented immigrants would "Jon"characterize as criminals?

[Todd Juvinall]

The SF Sheriff is also complicit and he doubled down. Now Obama's mouthpiece says it is GASP! The Republicans fault! Who wooda thunk that?

[joe smith]

Yet again, GR has censored my observation posted this morning. Juvinall's ascertation that Lojacks are "now on most cars" is a blatant lie. Rebane only post those "facts' that support his rhetoric and don't undermine his minions. Reminds me of Pelline who is castigated on these very pages for doing precisely the same.

[Bill Tozer]

Yes Jon, nothing to see hear, more on. We have something like a mere 20-30 thousand illegals here, right? Yes, I said thousands. If the illegal alien population ever got to as high as, say 650,000, then we might have a wee problem on our hands. Heaven forbid the illegal alien population in The United States Of Ametica ever reached as high as a million of them. Goodness gracious, thankfully we will never see the illegal alien population ever get that high. Imagine for a second that their population would reach 2 million foreign nationals. That is so far beyond comprehension it is a downright silly thought. You are correct, Mr.Jon. I agree with you 100%. Nothing to see here, move on....right?.......

[Bill Tozer]

PS to Mr. Jon: Donald Trump was right as well. America deserves the wall, Juan. We deserve it, period.
Jose, can you see by the starlights last gleaming?..
.I always remove my hat when I hear that version. Chokes me all up. Yep, remove the hat, cross it over my heart, bow my head, close my eyes and wait for the Good Parson to finish his spiel and do the "ashes to ashes, dust to dust part". RIP sovereign nation.

[Larry Wirth]

What if we truly close the border, allow residency for illegals already here and decide that although they can stay, they can never, ever become citizens (or vote)?

I think that might change Dim's view of how desirable they really are. L

[Larry Wirth]

And that goes for their kids, as well. Parents here illegally? You're also not a citizen. No more anchor Dims.

[Bill Tozer]

Oh Mr. Worth, how unfair. What's ours is their's, silly. Just because Momasita and Papa Pablo made a turd, that does not mean we can't at least try to teach the young turd to speak English. We are not in the business of breaking up families. In the unlikely event some criminal actually gets deported, the broken family can go to their nation of origin for a grande family reunion and family reunification. Little turd can break the pinnada .

[Ben Emery]

"A group of the world’s leading experts on computer and Internet security published a paper this week on just how deeply flawed Comey’s demand is. Fifteen authors contributed to the paper, published by MIT and titled “Keys Under Doormats: Mandating insecurity by requiring government access to all data and communications.”

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2015/7/9/cybersecurity_encryption_and_the_golden_age

[Steven Frisch]

Oh how apropos, comparing a child, a person, a citizen born in the USA under the 14th amendment, to a turd. Makes me proud to be an American this morning to see my fellows comparing people to shit and reveling in the humor of their hardships.

[George Rebane]

BenE 641am - Thank you Ben for the link. Have no idea how readers got on the illegal alien problem here when my post is about new stretches for the 4th Amendment.

Anybody besides Mr Emery have any thoughts about how far the Fourth demands that a citizen needs to bend over to facilitate government searches and seizures?

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: George Rebane | 09 July 2015 at 07:57 AM

Yeah, I will bite George. I am solidly with you and Ben on this one; the 4th amendment protects citizens from cyber espionage especially from our own government, and should only be allowed as part of a legal court ordered process that can show probable cause, in my humble opinion.

[Todd Juvinall]

Does the Bill of Rights mean anything any more? Seems as if Justice Roberts sees things in it that are a dream. I have no confidence that anyone in power actually cares about our laws. America is under political correctness attacks and right now the Fourth Amendment means zip. Hell the government can confiscate your vehicle if you are stopping and chatting with a police undercover female and you say the "wrong thing". They use it to take your property as well before you are convicted! The SCOTUS has endorsed that crapola so is it any wonder no one I know believes them at all? Remember, they said slaves were property and then later Plessy v Ferguson said "separate but equal".

Now a "bakery" can't sell their property to whomever they want. Oregon has gone totally fascist.

[Ben Emery]

We have seen small versions of this for decades but since 2001 the combo of digital age exploding and the Constitution shredding administrations of Bush and Obama we have taken a slippery slope and made it into an ice slide.

The problem once a program is introduced into our very corrupt system of government it is very tough to reverse or remove unless a huge check for funding our two parties is involved.

Airport Radiation Chamber(I refuse to go through) which makes my 4th amendment violation take at least 15-30 minutes longer.

Ex-Homeland Security chief head said to abuse public trust by touting body scanners
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/31/AR2009123102821.html

[Patricia Smith]

George, you must have known this topic would be too irresistible for me to remain silent. Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in! LOL.

I think we are all in agreement that our privacy rights have been eroded to the point of being non-existent. This is Big Brother at its worst. Two guesses how we got here.

The War on Drugs turned the Fourth Amendment on its head - and good patriotic citizens remained silent. The coup de grace was the War on Terror. Again, good people allowed themselves to be fear-mongered into accepting spyware technology that snoops on every phone call we make, every place we drive, every organization we join.

I hear people say, "Let them spy on me. I've got nothing to hide." This kind of thinking allows spying to continue. Just remember, regimes come and go. The IRS targeted the Tea Party and I'm sure any other groups and their members (like Occupy Wall Street) have been targeted for their political beliefs.

The ACLU is mounting a campaign to moniter the use of these new technologies in our County. Policy procedures are necessary to protect law abidig citizens from searches that go beyond the intended target and gather information on everybody within range of the cell tower.

Now I can't wait to hear how this is all the fault of liberals instead of looking at the policies and doing something proactive to change them. It's so much easier to blame than change.

[Todd Juvinall]

Is a environmental health person for the government abridging the 4th when they enter unannounced into a restaurant kitchen?

[Ben Emery]

This is where corporate personhood comes in Todd.

Individual Rights vs. Governmental Privileges. A business/ corporation is a privilege not a right. No health inspectors are not violating the business privileges of making sure their kitchen is sanitary. Now if those same inspectors went to the business owners home and forced their way in to inspect conditions that would be a violation of the 4th amendment.

[Walt]

Those who give up freedom for security deserve neither. ( OK,, who said that?)
Our freedoms are dying a death by a thousand cuts. And LIBS are holding the knife.
Back when Bush signed the Patriot act, LIBS screamed bloody murder. Today, those same LIBS have added more to it in the form of domestic spying and sing it's praises. ( yet not one arrest or terrorist attack has been stopped with all that info gathering.. Boston bombers anyone?)
We have had one of those surveillance flights on and off right up here for over a year.
( then I get accused of being a member of the tin foil hat brigade, despite the evidence supplied.)

The FBI has claimed they have stopped many an attack. ( Proof please) Yet say they may not be able to keep it up. ( why???)
Known terrorists have been caught crossing the boarder. And those are just the ones that HAVE been caught. ( How many have got through?)

There are many ways for the bad guys to communicate other that cell phones. Every gaming console is a potential communication devise. ( Online games have "private chat" abilities)

When it comes to personal safety and public safety, in today's world, carrying a gun is the best defence. The more guns in the hands of the law abiding citizen the better.
Those places with the strictest anti gun laws, the more killings there are. ( Chicago, Detroit and D.C. anyone?)

Now that pot is legal in D.C.,, it's MORE than obvious the members of the Supreme Court
are smoking more than their fair share. ( for medicinal purposes no doubt)
Their rash of more than Questionable decisions this year are pretty good proof of that.

[Ben Emery]

Walt,
You are stating the dangers of partisanship. When Bush did it Republicans cheered him on and when Obama did it Democrats cheered him on. All the while going apeshit when the other was doing it.

I have opposed it consistently against any administration, yes in the streets opposed it. In 2010 debate I made a statement that I thought President Obama should be indicted on war crimes just as I did with the Bush administration and every administration going back to the Reagan administration. Basically our foreign policy assures our executive branch will commit war crimes and since neither party will ever hold the other party fully accountable we continue to see it happen.

[Todd Juvinall]

Hey Walt call me.

[Patricia Smith]

Thanks Walt for being consistent. Of course, it's all the Libs fault! And please explain what guns rights have to do with privacy issues. It would be great if you could stay on topic.

[Ben Emery]

Patricia,
I think Walt combined like 5 comments into one without making any distinction what they were about.

If we all could get off of the blame game and just look at what is going on we would have an overwhelming majority of Americans on the same page. That is the job of the big two political parties and media, keep the masses divided and arguing over stupid crap while the Constitution gets shredded.

My opinion of course.

[Patricia Smith]

Yes Ben, it is the job of the two big political parties to keep us arguing so they can pass crap like the Patriot Act, TPP, NAFTA, etc. Sa that it is so effective.