Warrants needed to search cellphones in U.S.

Mobile devices contain ‘the privacies of life,’ unanimous Supreme Court rules

WASHINGTON — In a strong defence of digital-age privacy, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police may not generally search the cellphones of people they arrest without first getting search warrants.

Cellphones are powerful devices unlike anything else police may find on someone they arrest, Chief Justice John Roberts said for the court. Because the phones contain so much informa- tion, police must get a warrant before looking through them, Roberts said.

“Modern cellphones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain ... they hold for many Americans the privacies of life,” he said.

The U.S. Supreme Court chose not to extend earlier rulings that allow police to empty a suspect’s pockets and examine whatever they find to ensure officers’ safety and prevent the destruction of evidence.

The Obama administration and the state of California said cellphones should have no greater protection from a search than anything else police find.

But the defendants in these cases, backed by civil libertarians, librarians and news media groups, argued that cellphones, especially smartphones, are powerful computers that can store troves of personal information.

One exception to the warrant requirement left open by the decision is a case in which officers fear for their safety or the lives of others.

Last November, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a similar decision, ruling that there are far more privacy interests at stake when police search computers and mobile phones than when they riffle through cupboards and filing cabinets.