- Associated Press - Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Editorials from around Pennsylvania:

___

SMART, HISTORIC RULING ON CELLPHONE PRIVACY

In 2012, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. told a university audience that the challenge for the Supreme Court for the next 50 years would be: “How do we adapt old, established rules to new technology?”

Recently, the court proved itself equal to that challenge in at least one context. It ruled unanimously that, except in extraordinary cases, police must obtain a warrant before searching the contents of an arrested person’s cellphone.

This is a historic decision because allowing police to sift through the contents of a modern smartphone gives them access to a wealth of information about a person’s most private and personal affairs, from emails to family photos to bank statements. As Roberts wrote in his magisterial majority opinion: “With all they contain and all they may reveal, (cellphones) hold for many Americans ‘the privacies of life.’”

In the case of David L. Riley, a San Diego man arrested on weapons charges, those privacies included a photograph police found on his phone showing him in front of a car used in a drive-by shooting. Riley was eventually convicted of attempted murder.

You don’t need a law degree to believe that allowing police to search through a cellphone without a warrant is an “unreasonable search” of the kind prohibited by the 4th Amendment. But to reach that conclusion, Roberts had to wrestle with a 1973 decision that gave police wide discretion to search people they arrested— including packages in their pockets — even if the search wasn’t necessary to disarm the suspect or prevent the destruction of evidence.

Rather than overruling that decision, Roberts declined to extend its reasoning to cellphones, which contain the sort of records that would have been stored in private homes at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. “The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the founders fought,” Roberts wrote.

-The (Hanover) Evening Sun

___

LEGISLATIVE MISCHIEF: STATE’S CARBON PLAN SHOULD BE DEVISED BY EXPERTS

Opponents of President Barack Obama’s plan to combat carbon pollution might sermonize about choice and control, but a bill that passed the state House of Representatives Tuesday could unwittingly undermine Pennsylvanians’ ability to chart their own future.

Under federal guidelines issued in June, the state Department of Environmental Protection must submit a plan to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on how Pennsylvania will cut emissions from existing power plants by almost a third by 2030.

But House Bill 2354 from state Rep. Pam Snyder, D-Greene County, would impose a number of constraints on the state plan, notably the requirement that it be approved by the General Assembly first.

Story Continues →