Surveillance

Chaffetz Wants Cops to Get a Warrant Before Snooping on Your Cellphone

The Department of Homeland Security spent more than $1.8 million on grants that allow local police departments to buy and use stingrays.

|

MICHAEL REYNOLDS/EPA/Newscom

When a cellphone was stolen from a car in Baltimore in 2009, city police broke out their newest toy. Using a device that tricks cellphones into thinking it is a cell tower, they were able to scoop up data from every phone in range, and eventually cornered the suspect.

In Tallahassee, Florida, local police used similar technology to track a woman wanted for forging checks, USA Today reported last year as part of an investigation with the American Civil Liberties Union. In Tacoma, Washington, another cell tower simulator was used to track a man suspected of stealing a laptop.

The cops arrested a suspect in each of those cases, but not before scooping up untold amounts of data from the cellphones of innocent people who just happened to be in the vicinity. As more information emerges about how federal and local law enforcement agencies regularly have used so-called "stingrays" to secretly sift through cellphone signals by intercepting communications between the phone and a service providers' network—usually without a warrant and without targeting a specific suspect—there are more questions being raised about when and how those devices should be deployed.

U.S. Rep Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), on Wednesday morning announced plans to introduce two bills into Congress to limit federal law enforcement's use of cell tower simulators.

One bill would prohibited federal law enforcement agencies from using stingray technology unless they are investigating a specific person and can show probable cause. It would put an end to sweeping uses of cell tower simulators, as was done in Baltimore during the Freddie Gray protests in 2015, to collect information on all cellphones in a given area.

"To me, tracking everybody, especially suspicion-less Americans, that's a step too far," he said during a discussion of stingray technology at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, D.C. "Fundamentally, where I come from, I don't trust the federal government. That's my starting premise."

According to a House Oversight Committee report, published in December, the Department of Justice has 310 cell-site simulation devices and spent more than $71 million in fiscal years 2010-14 on cell-site simulation technology, while the Department of Homeland Security has 124 cell-site simulation devices and spent more than $24 million in fiscal years 2010-14 on cell-site simulation technology. The same investigation found that the Department of Homeland Security spent more than $1.8 million on grants that allow local police departments to buy and use Stingrays.

A Baltimore detective revealed last year that the Baltimore Police Department deployed cell tower simulators more than 4,300 times between 2007 and 2015—for investigating everything from kidnappings and murders to minor thefts.

Chaffetz, who chairs the House Oversight Committee, said his second proposal would make it illegal for Stingrays to be used outside of law enforcement. Chaffetz said he views the devices as a violation of a contract signed between individuals and cellphone service providers.

"If someone else is getting in between you and that service provider, well that's not what you're paying for," he said.

Chaffetz introduced similar bills in 2015, but they did not pass.

Neema Singh Guliani, legislative counsel for the ACLU, called Chaffetz bills "a good first step" but said more action was needed from state governments and the courts to place limitations on how Stingrays are deployed and how the data collected by the devices can be used in criminal trials.

Many state lawmakers don't even know that state and local police are using the technology, she said, because the grants from DHS took place outside the normal appropriations and procurement processes. Those grants also came with nondisclosure agreements that in many cases prevent local police from disclosing their possession and use of stingrays to lawmakers, defense attorneys, and even judges.

California, Washington, Virginia, Utah, and Illinois have passed laws requiring law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant or order based on probable cause before deploying cell-site simulators, with varying exceptions, according to the House Oversight Committee report.

State legislatures should demand information from police departments about how Stingrays are being used, and should pass laws requiring police departments to get permission from their state governments before deploying any new surveillance technology passed down from the feds, Guliani argued.

NEXT: John McCain Approves of All Trump Nominees Except the Fiscally Conservative Budget Director Who Dares Question Military Spending

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Many state lawmakers don’t even know that state and local police are using the technology, she said, because the grants from DHS took place outside the normal appropriations and procurement processes. Those grants also came with nondisclosure agreements that in many cases prevent local police from disclosing their possession and use of stingrays to lawmakers, defense attorneys, and even judges.

    Seems legit

  2. I really wasn’t expecting something like this from Chaffetz, of all people. It seems surreal to actually hear Congress talk about passing laws. What the hell has taken them so long to do this? You control every branch of the federal government. PASS SOME DAMN LAWS

    1. Good on him. Hopefully more freedom loving congress critters will wake up from their slumber.

    2. In fairness, maybe he has read the constitution, and knows that no law is required. Just arrest and try those who violate the fourth amendment.

    3. Nancy Pelosi hasn’t yet spoken on this, that I am aware of. I’m sure its too secret to know about.

  3. But cell phone users are terrorist so dumbass americans will dismiss this.

  4. I posted this in the past but it was a day after the article was written because i was busy. So i’ll post it again

    BTW I have messaged Reason and EFF several times over the last 2 or 3 years and they have yet to report about it.

    But IL IPASS takes your photo every time you go through whether you pay or not and keeps this record at the IL Police head quarters and local LEOs can request access to it.

    I found out about this from a North Aurora cop who taught criminal justice classes i was taking for my own education of my enemy 😀 know thy enemy of course.

    I also ready in a Pop Science hack your stuff section about 5 years ago the reason IPass never beeps anymore is because they turned it into a tracking device.

    The guy at pop science put a beeper in it and had a WTF moment when it constantly went off as he drove around. He realized it was a tracking system set up to log and map the IPASS movement…essentially you.

    Again Reason and EFF still have been ignoring this for some reason.

    I assume it is those white rectangles every quarter mile on the highway that scan the IPASSes.

    1. I constantly give it knife hands, middle fingers, holding my hand rifle shooting it (USMC thing), drive blind with my hands over my eyes, drove through it with a yeti costume on i bought off amazon, hanged myself, budd dwyered myself and so many other obscene things so they have 100s if not 1000s of funny photos of me.

      I would FIOA request all my photos and make a funny photo book out of it and post it online but i don’t really know how to FIOA request that or if they would just pretend it doesn’t exist or say for privacy reasont hey can’t release MY photos to ME. :/

      It was annoying enough to FOIA a dashcam that was conveniently half missing with the important sounds of the officer saying highly illegal shit missing. I wanted to sue them for illegally detaining me for nearly 30 mins in 34F weather because i asked several neighbors if they were missing a dog. Fucking slavers. Sadly a lawyer said unless i get shot or beaten judges dont care….so as long as its only inconveniencing and highly illegal it is okay. Anything is good to a judge as long as i am not beaten or killed….fuck i hate people

  5. Bentley . true that Ashley `s blurb is good… last week I got Lotus Esprit sincere getting a check for $5815 this-last/five weeks and-even more than, ten/k lass-month . without a doubt it is the easiest work I’ve ever done . I began this seven months/ago and almost immediately started earning minimum $77… per-hour . more tips here.
    ======== ____________ http://www.4dayjobs.com

  6. The cops arrested a suspect in each of those cases, but not before scooping up untold amounts of data from the cellphones of innocent people who just happened to be in the vicinity. As more information emerges about how federal and local law enforcement agencies regularly have used so-called “stingrays” to secretly sift through cellphone signals by intercepting communications between the ???? ???? ? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ???? phone and a service providers’ network?usually without a warrant and without targeting a specific suspect?there are more questions being raised about when and how those devices should be deployed.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.