Dylan Tomas Kastel

Summer School English 11

The debate over an updated civil rights for a digital age has been slowly gaining
coverage in the news. Most Americans believe that their right to privacy, Amendment IV,
should be extended to their Cell Phones. Majority of these Americans are reporters who insist
that not only is their right to privacy, Amendment IV, being invaded but their right to Press,
Amendment I, is being limited. The article, Why the Supreme Court Cell Phone Decision Is a
Win for Press Freedom by Josh Sterns, examines the different perspectives of the recent
Supreme Court Ruling.
On June 25
th
, The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that police need a warrant to
search the cellphones of the people they arrest. The Supreme Court ruling applied to
cellphones, there was no mention of Laptops, Tablets, and other media storing devices.
[This ruling] is being heralded as a major victory for privacy rights and a landmark case with
implications far beyond cellphones. (Stearns, 2014) As Stearns and other activist chalk this up
as a win, there are many limitations of this ruling. Though the ruling is limited, this ruling is
positive and effective. Both Reporters and average citizens can feel a little more private about
their cellphones as a result of the ruling. However, this ruling is also being discussed from
different angles. A right to record, Cellphones are a Reporters Notebook are the two that are
most current.
In a world containing the internet, anybody with access can become a reporter.
Essentially all you need is an internet connection, a blog or any social media, and a digital
audience. Now people can get specialized news to their specific wants and needs. With
everyone being a reporter, one necessary part of the process of reporting is recording.
Recording the news by ways of audio recordings, videos, Pictures, e-mails, etc. The right to
record is an essential component of our rights at a time when those witnessing public protests
carry networked, camera-ready devices such as smartphones. (Stearns, 2013) This idea was
tested in the case against Simon Glik, the case highlighted a preliminary problem with cell
phone reporting. With the recent ruling, Mr. Glik and others like him can continue reporting
without having the police searching his phone unless theyre doing something illegal.
Though protecting the right to record the current events is one angle this ruling is being
interpreted, most journalists nowadays claim their cellphones are their notebooks. A typical
journalists phone contains a wealth of private dataAt any time a journalists phone may
include drafts of stories, interviews, corresponding photos or video, information about sources,
and other confidential information necessary for reporting. (Stearns, 2013) This quote explains
the modern reporters relationship with their cellphones. If a cellphone is notebook, then it
should be treated as a personal notebook in the legal system. If a notebook was needed for an
investigation then the Police would need a warrant to claim the notebook as evidence. This
ruling makes cellphones an extension of a person.
This ruling has declared cell phones as something more than an object. Cellphones are
an extension of a person and should be treated like that in a court. This ruling has successfully
completed this and will hopefully start more cases containing cellphones and other digital
media devices and services.