Republican Legislature Attempts to Counter Controversial Law Enforcement Strategy

While government officials in Washington continue to do nothing about Uncle Sam's voracious, and constitutionally suspect, data harvesting practices, there is some hope at the state level that such wanton privacy abuses might be curbed.

Via the Tenth Amendment Center, we learn that the North Dakota Senate has approved a proposed amendment that would add search and seizure protections to “electronic data and communications.”

This is a positive development – for common sense and for personal privacy, if only on the state level. As Mike Maharrey writes:

[The] inclusion of electronic communications and data in the state's constitutional prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures means state and local police in North Dakota would be required to obtain a judicial warrant, supported by probable cause, before accessing cell phones and other electronic devices regardless of any legislative statute. It would also set the foundation to help prevent law enforcement from accessing private information through third parties.

Law enforcement officials using third-party services to get access to data like cell phone location – without having to obtain search warrants – is a growing problem. It's not just the supposed “bad guys” whose data and locations get captured. It's everyone. That's an insult to the Fourth Amendment.

What effects would the North Dakota amendment, if approved, have at the federal level? Maharrey writes:

…local data collection using ALPRs, stingrays, drones and other spy technologies create the potential for the federal government to track the movement of millions of Americans, and obtain and store information on millions of Americans, including phone calls, emails, web browsing history and text messages, all with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.

In a nutshell, without state and local assistance, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. When the state limits surveillance and data collection, it means less information the feds can tap into. This represents a major blow to the surveillance state and a win for privacy.

Perhaps it does. The race between surveillance technology, law enforcement's desire to exploit it, and individual privacy tends to favor the state. That doesn't' mean fight like North Dakota's are worthless – far from it. What it means is more states need to join the fight to bring privacy protections into the 21 century.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

READ NEXT: Top House Republican Raises Alarm After FBI's Latest Biden Discovery