Supreme Court Rules Police Need Warrant to Search Your Cellphone

What's This?

A pedestrian uses a smartphone as he walks along Market Street on June 5, 2013 in San Francisco, California.

Image: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

By Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai2014-06-25 14:51:18 UTC

In a landmark digital privacy decision, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Wednesday that police officers must have warrants to search suspects' cellphones upon arrest.

The justices ruled that police cannot search a cellphone without a warrant because they deserve special protection, as they contain so much information about a person's private life, and they are pervasive. The court ruled together on two separate but very similar cases.

See also: 7 Landmark Tech Laws Passed in 2013

Prior to this decision, police officers did not need warrants to search suspects' cellphones. The Supreme Court had previously ruled that police could empty a suspect's pockets and examine the contents to ensure officers' safety and prevent the destruction of evidence. Now, the Supreme Court is saying that a cellphone isn't fair game.

"Modern cellphones are not just another technological convenience, with all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans the privacies of life," Justice Roberts wrote. "Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple — get a warrant."

You can find the full Supreme Court decision below:

RILEY v. CALIFORNIA

Additional reporting from the Associated Press

Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.

Topics: 4th amendment, cellphones, law, Supreme Court, U.S., US & World