FEDS BRING GPS TRACKING HOME

The handwriting has been on the wall for quite some time; and now
it's official, at least for nine far west states the government can
place a GPS tracking device on your car while it is parked on your
own property; then track and record your movements for an indefinite
period of time, without ever securing a warrant to do so. This
frightening situation is the result of a recent decision by the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals.

So far, not all federal circuits agree with this decision, and at
least one in the District of Columbia - just days before the Ninth
Circuit's decision, had reached the opposite conclusion. Clearly,
however, this ruling will embolden federal agents and prosecutors in
other parts of the country to engage in similar, privacy-invasive and
constitutionally suspect surveillance.

This case began with a Drug Enforcement Administration agent's
suspicions in May 2007, that an Oregon man by the name of Juan
Pineda-Moreno was buying products from a local Home Depot that were
of the type and quantity suspected of use in cultivating marijuana.
To make their job of tracking Pineda-Moreno easier, the agents
decided to sneak onto his driveway in the wee hours of the morning
and attach a small GPS tracking device to the underside of his car.
Over a four-month period, and replacing the tracking device
periodically, the agents eventually were led to a marijuana plot.

The controversy eventually found its way to the Ninth Circuit, which
early this year affirmed the government's actions. On August 12th,
the court refused a request by Pineda-Moreno to have the entire panel
of circuit judges decide the matter; thus giving the feds a green
light for warrantless GPS tracking.

A blistering and unusually blunt dissent to the Ninth Circuit's
opinion was issued by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski (a Reagan appointee).
In his dissent, he notes the frightening ramifications for homeowners
of the court's action.

Kozinski correctly concludes that, if allowed to stand, the Ninth
Circuit's ruling will completely "dismantle the zone of privacy"
long-recognized for areas adjacent or connected to one's house. He
then properly chastises his fellow jurists for concluding against
all common-sense understanding - that a homeowner has no "expectation
of privacy" in their driveway or their private vehicle parked thereon.

Laughably, the majority judges apparently believe that because the
homeowner in this case failed to post "No Trespassing" signs on his
property, or to seal off his driveway with a fence or a gate, he
consented to have police surreptitiously enter his property in the
dead of night and place a tracking device on his car. In this, the
judges absurdly likened the actions of the agents to a neighborhood
child retrieving an errant baseball from underneath the homeowner's car.

In an even more ludicrous twist of common sense, the majority decided
that because the undercarriage of a vehicle is not observable by the
public, it is permissible for a GPS tracking device to be placed
underneath the car, but perhaps not okay for the very same device to
be placed in plain view on the door panel. The theory apparently
being that what is not readily seen by the public is an area over
which a person has no "expectation of privacy."

The Ninth Circuit's opinion as absurd on its face as it is - puts
directly at risk nearly one-fifth of the country's population in the
western states; and indirectly, homeowners in all 50 states. And even
if the Supreme Court steps in to resolve the inter-circuit
disagreement, there's no guarantee its current configuration would
agree with Judge Kozinski.

At least for now, homeowners should watch what they buy at Home
Depot, put "No Trespassing" signs on their property, gate their
driveways, shoo any wandering kids away, and check under their cars every day.