[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[off-topic] roving wiretaps

In article <[email protected]>,
E. ALLEN SMITH <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> The Administration's proposal would also significantly expand current
> wiretapping authority to allow multi-point (or "roving") wiretaps. This
> would dramatically change surveillance authority to include wiretaps of
> INDIVIDUALS instead of LOCATIONS.
> 

I don't get it.  Help me out here-- how can this possibly be constitutional?

I'm reading the Fourth Amendment to our honored Constitution of the United
States, which proclaims

	[...]
	no warrants shall issue,
	but upon probable cause,
	supported by oath or affirmation,
	and *particularly describing the place to be searched*,
	and the persons or things to be seized.

Are we just to strike out that emphasized phrase?  What's going on here?
Someone tell me I'm not just having a bad nightmare.

Apologies if these are silly questions,
-- Dave Wagner

P.S.  Do police really need a search warrant to wiretap cellular phones?