
“It’s worth stepping back to think through the logic embraced by Los Angeles, the LAPD, a district court, a Ninth Circuit dissent, and now, four dissenting Supreme Court justices. All seem comfortable with something that wasn’t addressed directly: the notion that hotel and motel guests have no right to privacy in information that they voluntarily turn over to third parties, per Smith v. Maryland. The third-party information precedent is problematic on its own. But it is devastating to privacy when paired with laws that compel businesses to collect detailed information on customers and to turn it over to police without warrants, destroying the ability to enter voluntary transactions that include discretion.”
Related posts:
WSJ: How MDMA Went From Club Drug to ‘Breakthrough Therapy’
N.H. City Wants a "Tank" to Use Against Occupiers and Libertarians
U.S. decision delayed on easing gadget use on airplanes
US 'told Syria rebels' to seek intervention
Decoding Bitcoin
Holiday in Thailand could end for expats
Wall Street Journal accused of concealing writers' Mitt Romney links
Can Freedom-Loving Czechs Build a New Nation on the Danube?
France’s new ‘cat cafe’ is predictably full of rescued kitties
France backs action on Syria as U.S. seeks coalition
Small-town $5-per-visit doctor takes down his shingle
Poland and Bulgaria Shelve Plans to Join Eurozone
Deputies punished for actions during 1:30 am wrong-address arrest
New Rochelle sued by veterans group over Gadsden flag removal
Banks desert Somalia