preview

Search And Seizure: A Case Study

Good Essays

Title
21397073, Mustafa Alsoufi
By the end of April 2016, The Supreme Court of United States of America accepted to make some changes to rule 41, Search and Seizure. It is a rule that gives authorization to magistrate judges in any region or district, where a crime activity may have occurred, to release a warrant to search and seize [1]. A change in this rule will allow the FBI to need a single warrant from the magistrate judge to hack and install malware in suspects’ computers accused of undergoing some digital criminal activities. Utilizing that warrant, the investigation department can remotely search computers even if the warrant they possess is outside the magistrate judge district. The peoples’ opinion is split into two sides; one agrees …show more content…

The government will have the power to hack people’s privacy and get access to their personal information. Damaging publics’ devices with malware systems is not a part of a dismal plot of an imaginary vision, but the reality of what the US committee of justice has requested from the government to authorize [2]. The proposal was requested as at times it can be quite challenging to determine the location of a suspect who might be involved in some criminal activities using their devices [3]. In some cases, if an inspection is undergone by agents investigating a criminal who is sexually abusing children and uploading videos of that action online, on top of the use of some technological software to hide his/her physical location, agents will need a search warrant from the judge in order to specifically locate them. Approval of granting this sort of warrants may come from some judges but others may refuse due to the lack of evidence in reference to the current rule [4]. Despite the valid argument of why rule 41 may require amendments, this kind of conduct is going to impact many of those using a device that is connected to the internet world wide. These digital devices are very complicated and not easy to handle, carrying out thousands of specific actions behind their screens which governs how it functions. Hence, a small virus or malware coming into the system can bring up …show more content…

The change to rule 41 is a clear violation to the fourth amendment. Mr. Kevin Bankston, the principal of New America’s Open Technology Institute mentioned in one of his own statements that this kind of laws goes further than wiretapping. In comparison with ordinary searches and wiretapping, hacking is clearly more invasive and violates the fourth amendment, which protects people from being searched unreasonably. Moreover, it raises more concerns and risks to the security and privacy than wiretapping [13]. Many Americans want liberty and privacy, but these changes don’t give them much of either. American people desire liberty and security, but the proposed modifications do not give them much of either. this kind of adjustment can grant the government more power to hack smart devices by allowing the FBI to use unproved malware systems; therefore, the safety and privacy is diminished and the risk of losing data and damaging hospital systems will not be the result of the US congress’ wrong decision for allowing such a change, but because something had been done automatically [11]. The FBI claims that they will

Get Access