• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    17 months ago

    What’s the point of warrants if they’re boo longer needed?

    If you give the police permission to conduct a search, they do not need a warrant.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      77 months ago

      But she didn’t give permission.

      Why does Verizon have the authority to give it for her?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        That set it up so that the material handed over was in Verizon’s possession (business records) and Verizon gave permission. The law is written so that they need a warrant for an actual wiretap (call contents) but not the metadata. Of course metadata is all you need to stalk the person, so that should need a warrant too.

        It’s fairly easy to avoid giving your cellular carrier your address (get the bills sent to a PO box} or even your name (buy a prepaid phone with cash). But it’s harder to keep your call records or geolocation info away from them. :(

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          17 months ago

          It was my understanding that warrants were needed to force the acquisition of information, regardless of the type of information. Even call contents are allowed to be freely given to the police as long as you have legitimate access to it.

          So Verizon has the ability to say “no” to the metadata too.

          They just choose not to.

          They choose to sell it rather than force the police to get a warrant. Perhaps they give it for free, I don’t know, but either way, they’re not forced to without a warrant.