EDITORIAL: Police eavesdropping

Federal, state and local law enforcement agencies routinely use cell-site simulators that mimic cellphone towers and allow them to collect basic data from cellphones in certain areas. The information can determine the location of a targeted phone without its user having to make a call or send a text.

While these surveillance devices have been widely adopted by police departments and federal agencies for their usefulness in tracking down suspects, the technology has raised Fourth Amendment concerns — and rightly so.

According to a new report from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the Justice Department is currently utilizing 310 cell-site devices across its various agencies. The Department of Homeland Security has another 124 devices. Local police departments across the country have used them often, too, as has the IRS, which says it’s deployed the technology to pursue investigations into money laundering, identity theft and other crimes.

But while the devices provide clear benefits for law enforcement, privacy advocates worry that the devices are also able to collect data about innocent bystanders who happen to be within range of one of the simulators. The House committee says clearer guidelines are needed for this secretive practice, and police and federal agents should be up front with judges regarding its deployment.

“While law enforcement agencies should be able to utilize technology as a tool to help officers be safe and accomplish their missions, absent proper oversight and safeguards, the domestic use of cell-site simulators may well infringe upon the constitutional rights of citizens to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as the right to free association,” the report states.

The Justice Department issued new policies last year designed to ensure that — save for certain emergency circumstances — federal law enforcement officials obtain search warrants before using the technology. (The Department of Homeland Security issued a similar mandate, as well.) While the policy applies to federal agencies within the Justice Department, it didn’t apply, as some privacy advocates had hoped, to state and local law enforcement, whose use of the simulators has raised the eyebrows of judges.

The House committee made several recommendations, including calling on state and local agencies to adopt policies similar to those at the federal level.

While there’s nothing wrong with law enforcement agencies using cell-site simulators, they must do so within the parameters of the Fourth Amendment. State and local agencies should adopt the stricter federal standards, as the committee recommends, or they risk having evidence thrown out of court.