Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

The Case Against Warrantless Cell Phone Snooping by the Cops

Damon Root | 3.31.2014 4:40 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

In April the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a pair of cases asking whether the police must obtain a warrant before searching the cell phones of people they have under arrest. At The Connecticut Law Tribune, the lawyer who writes under the name Gideon's Trumpet makes the case against giving the cops free rein to snoop:

Think about any random day. You make phone calls, which tells the phone companies where you are and who you're talking to. You send text messages, which stores the content of your conversation. You take pictures, which are stored on your phone. And you download apps that have your bank account and credit card information, maybe even some medical records.

So, if you're arrested—and remember, almost anyone can be arrested; that doesn't mean they're actually guilty of anything—should the police have the authority to simply open your phone and look through every personal email, Twitter update, Facebook status, credit card statement and nude picture? For that matter, should the police have the authority to track your movements without a warrant?

In a recent column on these two cases I posed a similar question: "Should getting arrested for a minor offense like jaywalking be sufficient to allow the police virtually unlimited access to your private affairs in search of additional wrongdoing?" Unhappily, the Obama administration thinks it should. "Although cell phones can contain a great deal of personal information," the administration has argued in a legal filing, "so can many other items that officers have long had authority to search, and the search of a cell phone is no more intrusive than other actions that the police may take once a person has been lawfully arrested."

The problem with that argument is that a cell phone search has the potential to be far more intrusive than any search incident to arrest of your pockets, briefcase, purse, or backpack. That's because, as noted above, cell phones contain not only photos and messages; they also contain GPS tracking data. Thanks to the wonders of technology, our most sensitive and private information—including our whereabouts at various times—is now accessible in the palms of our hands. It's no mystery why law enforcement wants to take a peek. Yet as Gideon's Trumpet observes, "the real reason why police want unfettered access to the phone is precisely the reason why they should not get it."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Russian Military Buildup Questioned, HealthCare.gov Still Malfunctioning, French Leaders Step Down: P.M. Links

Damon Root is a senior editor at Reason and the author of A Glorious Liberty: Frederick Douglass and the Fight for an Antislavery Constitution (Potomac Books). His next book, Emancipation War: The Fall of Slavery and the Coming of the Thirteenth Amendment (Potomac Books), will be published in June 2026.

PolicyCivil LibertiesPoliceFourth AmendmentPrivacySupreme Court
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (14)

Latest

3 Areas Where the Courts Pushed Back Against Trump's Attempts To Avoid Judicial Review in 2025

Jacob Sullum | 1.1.2026 3:45 PM

Why Mitt Romney's Call To Tax the Rich Falls Apart

Veronique de Rugy | 1.1.2026 11:14 AM

Betty Boop Enters the Public Domain, but Only as a Dog

Joe Lancaster | 1.1.2026 8:00 AM

Nick Shirley, Tim Walz, and the Minnesota Fraud Story: Did the Media Miss It?

Robby Soave | 1.1.2026 7:30 AM

Did Brett Kavanaugh Just Apologize for Butchering the Fourth Amendment? Maybe.

Damon Root | 1.1.2026 7:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks