	
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>unreasonable search &#8211; Security vs. Privacy</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.securityvsprivacy.com/tag/unreasonable-search/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.securityvsprivacy.com</link>
	<description>Striking a balance in the modern world</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:13:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.3.8</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Supreme Court rules unanimously in GPS case</title>
		<link>https://www.securityvsprivacy.com/2012/01/23/supreme-court-rules-unanimously-in-gps-case/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:13:02 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Gadgets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cops]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment protections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment searches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment violations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GPS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GPS trackers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GPS tracking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GPS warrants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police officer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right to privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unreasonable search]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.securityvsprivacy.com/?p=43</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A recent case highlighted new challenges for privacy in the modern world. Cops placed a GPS tracker on the car of a criminal suspect without getting a warrant. Fortunately, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld a lower court decision that ruled that this was a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution which prevents unreasonable [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A recent case highlighted new challenges for privacy in the modern world. Cops placed a GPS tracker on the car of a criminal suspect without getting a warrant. Fortunately, the Supreme Court <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-warrants-needed-in-gps-tracking/2012/01/23/gIQAx7qGLQ_story.html" target="_blank">unanimously upheld</a> a lower court decision that ruled that this was a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution which prevents unreasonable searches without a warrant.</p>
<p>The court, however, declined to go further. Issues on other types of electronic surveillance will be left to another day. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Welfare drug testing law in Florida blocked by judge</title>
		<link>https://www.securityvsprivacy.com/2011/10/26/welfare-drug-testing-law-in-florida-blocked-by-judge/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 22:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drug War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failed War on Drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment protections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment searches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment violations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[idiotic Drug War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Mary Scriven]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Scott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Scott privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right to privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unreasonable drug tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unreasonable search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on Drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare drug tests]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.securityvsprivacy.com/?p=38</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Florida&#8217;s Tea Party governor, Rick Scott, has pretty much been a disaster. One of his worst initiatives was to institute drug testing for anyone receiving welfare benefits. Not only is this a gross violation of privacy rights, it also perpetuates our insane drug war and wastes taxpayer money at a time when budgets are being [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Florida&#8217;s Tea Party governor, Rick Scott, has pretty much been a disaster. One of his worst initiatives was to institute drug testing for anyone receiving welfare benefits.</p>
<p>Not only is this a gross violation of privacy rights, it also perpetuates our insane drug war and wastes taxpayer money at a time when budgets are being savaged.</p>
<p>A federal judge was <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/24/rick-scott-drug-testing-welfare-florida_n_1029332.html" target="_blank">not impressed</a> with the new law:</p>
<blockquote><p>
A federal judge temporarily blocked Florida&#8217;s new law that requires welfare applicants to pass a drug test before receiving benefits on Monday, saying it may violate the Constitution&#8217;s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.</p>
<p>Judge Mary Scriven ruled in response to a lawsuit filed on behalf of a 35-year-old Navy veteran and single father who sought the benefits while finishing his college degree, but refused to take the test. The judge said there was a good chance plaintiff Luis Lebron would succeed in his challenge to the law based on the Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals from being unfairly searched.</p>
<p>The drug test can reveal a host of private medical facts about the individual, Scriven wrote, adding that she found it &#8220;troubling&#8221; that the drug tests are not kept confidential like medical records. The results can also be shared with law enforcement officers and a drug abuse hotline.</p>
<p>&#8220;This potential interception of positive drug tests by law enforcement implicates a `far more substantial&#8217; invasion of privacy than in ordinary civil drug testing cases,&#8221; said Scriven, who was appointed by President George W. Bush.</p></blockquote>
<p>Hopefully he&#8217;s right and this idiotic law will be held unconstitutional.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/?utm_source=w3tc&utm_medium=footer_comment&utm_campaign=free_plugin

Page Caching using Disk: Enhanced 

Served from: www.securityvsprivacy.com @ 2026-06-14 19:04:06 by W3 Total Cache
-->