• @smeg@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    361 year ago

    the police acted in good faith, meaning the evidence will be allowed in court despite the warrant being legally flawed

    I have no knowledge (or particular interest) in USA laws, but I guess that judges making this decision is a statement of future intent. I guess if you don’t want to be tracked then don’t use services which track you!

    • @_number8_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      301 year ago

      this just means the cops can do anything??

      i mean shit i guess they can here anyway, but it’s stunning to see that written down. oh they thought they were doing the right thing? oh that’s fine then

    • @yeather@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      In Colorado, until a new law overides the ruling, google must reveal your search history when subpoenaed. This doesn’t affect surrounding states or federal law until their own judges make a ruling or politicians make a law.

      • TWeaK
        link
        fedilink
        English
        231 year ago

        The issue here is not that they are required to reveal search history of suspects, the issue is that the police is browsing the search history of everyone in order to find a suspect. That’s not what warrants are for and violates the constitutional rights of nearly everyone they searched.