The Most Important Sentence in the Supreme Court’s Cell Phone Privacy Ruling

Last week the Supreme Court decision of Riley v. California ruled that law enforcement agencies cannot search a cell phone unless they obtain a warrant. This decision shows a huge shift in the high court’s attitude toward technology and privacy, but it also sets precedent when other technology vs. privacy cases come to court. The government had argued that searching a cell phone is no different from searching other items in a suspect’s pocket. That, the court wrote, “is like saying a ride on horseback is materially indistinguishable from a flight to the moon.” Why is this important? It gives the mobile carriers like AT&T and Verizon a reason to deny claims from law enforcement officials. These are private companies and there’s no reason the government should assume they can access this data without first obtaining permission from the carrier, the tower owner, and the customer.