Court ruling forces FBI to deactivate GPS to track suspects

March 8, 2012
FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies on March 7, in Washington, DC. A recent US Supreme Court decision is hurting the ability of federal law enforcement agencies to monitor criminal suspects with global positioning satellites (GPS), according to Mueller.

A recent US Supreme Court decision is hurting the ability of federal law enforcement agencies to monitor criminal suspects with global positioning satellites (GPS), according to FBI Director Robert Mueller.

"I can't speak to the numbers, but a substantial number of trackers we have had to turn off," Mueller said Wednesday before a House of Representatives committee.

An FBI official recently said at a law school conference in San Francisco that the FBI operated about 3,000 GPS devices.

In late January, a limited the authority of police to use satellites for geolocation.

The court said police must obtain warrants before monitoring criminal suspects with GPS. Otherwise, police would infringe upon their constitutional rights of privacy.

Mueller said the ruling "is going to have an impact on the work that we do."

GPS "often saves us from physical surveillance," Mueller said. "Putting a physical surveillance team out with six, eight, 12 persons, is tremendously time-intensive."

In some cases, the FBI has lacked enough evidence to obtain warrants against terrorism suspects because of the time commitment required to gather incriminating evidence, Mueller said.

"And we are stuck in the position of surveying that person for a substantial period of time," Mueller said. GPS "trackers enabled us to utilize resources elsewhere."

The unanimous January 23 decision said GPS for tracking the movement of vehicles was an "intrusion."

The ruling resulted from a government appeal when an accused drug dealer's conviction was overturned by a lower court.

Some evidence used to convict the man was gathered with a after the warrant that authorized the satellite monitoring of his movements had expired.

As a result, the evidence could not be used to convict the defendant, the courts ruled.

Mueller said although wider use of GPS is useful to the , "We will comply with the ruling of the Supreme Court."

Explore further: Supreme Court to review warrantless GPS tracking (Update)

Related Stories

GPS court ruling leaves US phone tracking unclear

February 11, 2012

A US Supreme Court decision requiring a warrant to place a GPS device on the car of a criminal suspect leaves unresolved the bigger issue of police tracking using mobile phones, legal experts say.

Warrant needed for GPS tracking, high court says (Update)

January 23, 2012

(AP) -- In a rare defeat for law enforcement, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed on Monday to bar police from installing GPS technology to track suspects without first getting a judge's approval. The justices made clear ...

FBI director: Cyber-threats will become top worry

March 2, 2012

(AP) -- The director of the FBI told an annual gathering of cyber-security professionals on Thursday that the agency needs the private sector to help combat what he believes is becoming the nation's No. 1 threat.

High court troubled by warrantless GPS tracking (Update)

November 8, 2011

The Supreme Court invoked visions of an all-seeing Big Brother and satellites watching us from above. Then things got personal Tuesday when the justices were told police could slap GPS devices on their cars and track their ...

High court to rule on TV indecency, GPS tracking

June 28, 2011

(AP) -- The Supreme Court has added a couple of high-profile constitutional challenges to its lineup of cases for next term: One looking at governmental regulation of television content and the other dealing with the authority ...

Recommended for you

A not-quite-random walk demystifies the algorithm

December 15, 2017

The algorithm is having a cultural moment. Originally a math and computer science term, algorithms are now used to account for everything from military drone strikes and financial market forecasts to Google search results.

US faces moment of truth on 'net neutrality'

December 14, 2017

The acrimonious battle over "net neutrality" in America comes to a head Thursday with a US agency set to vote to roll back rules enacted two years earlier aimed at preventing a "two-speed" internet.

FCC votes along party lines to end 'net neutrality' (Update)

December 14, 2017

The Federal Communications Commission repealed the Obama-era "net neutrality" rules Thursday, giving internet service providers like Verizon, Comcast and AT&T a free hand to slow or block websites and apps as they see fit ...

The wet road to fast and stable batteries

December 14, 2017

An international team of scientists—including several researchers from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Argonne National Laboratory—has discovered an anode battery material with superfast charging and stable operation ...

6 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Caliban
3 / 5 (2) Mar 08, 2012
Mueller said the ruling "is going to have an impact on the work that we do."

GPS "often saves us from physical surveillance," Mueller said.

"Putting a physical surveillance team out with six, eight, 12 persons, is tremendously time-intensive."


Aw shucks, Bobby --do you mean to say that you actually have to have a strong case for wrongdoing(i.e., DO YOUR JOB)to present to the court before a GPS tracking warrant is granted? I guess this means that you'll have to stick to actual law enforcement, instead of being able to track a citizen's every move without their consent, merely on someone's say so, if not entirely at whim.

What an evil day for Bobby's FBI, to be compelled to operate under the Rule of Law.


Myno
not rated yet Mar 08, 2012
As I recall, the SCOTUS Justices were clear that certain details of the manner in which the GPS device had been used were instrumental in the ruling. This leaves the door open for other uses, which will probably wind their own ways up to the Court, at later dates, allowing the Justices to come to a more definitive ruling in the fullness of time, as the devices see broader usage.
Lurker2358
not rated yet Mar 08, 2012
That's just it caliban.

Without adequate surveillance, they CAN'T do their job, because the court throws out evidence.

What kind of "justice" is that when the evidence isn't allowed in court?
Ironhorse
not rated yet Mar 09, 2012


Aw shucks, Bobby --do you mean to say that you actually have to have a strong case for wrongdoing(i.e., DO YOUR JOB)to present to the court before a GPS tracking warrant is granted? I guess this means that you'll have to stick to actual law enforcement, instead of being able to track a citizen's every move without their consent, merely on someone's say so, if not entirely at whim.

What an evil day for Bobby's FBI, to be compelled to operate under the Rule of Law.



Actually it's J. Edgar's FBI, tutu and all ;P

@Lurker: The court is just saying they actually have to do the surveillance, not just slap a gps on someones car and hope for the best, that's just a fishing expedition.
Blakut
not rated yet Mar 09, 2012
Wait, so they had the possibility to track people with GPS at will, and 9/11 still happened? Hmm...
julianpenrod
1 / 5 (1) Mar 09, 2012
Telling, the concentrated initiative on failing to percevie the actual meaning of the ruling. The High Court did not say law enforcement could not use GPS. They said they had to have a warrant first! That's a fine point New World Order shills regularly avoid mentioning. The court is not restricting law enforcement in wire tapping or other forms of curveillance, it only requires that they do it legally! If someone doesn't wan to have their name linked to New WQorld Order shills, they shouldn't act like one.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.