In article <01I7RM0CJM388Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>, E. ALLEN SMITH <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU> 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?