The government can get warrants requiring email service...
The government can get warrants requiring email service providers to turn over all account information for an indefinite period of time, said the U.S. District Court in New York City in a Friday memorandum opinion explaining a June 11 warrant…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
approval (http://bit.ly/1yRqww7). The court noted its divergence with other recent district court rulings on similar matters as the reason for issuing an explanation. The U.S. District Courts for the District of Columbia and the District of Kansas refused to issue such warrants because they would not limit what content could be disclosed and would allow the government to seize large quantities of emails without establishing probable cause, said the New York court’s Friday opinion. That argument “too narrowly construes the Fourth Amendment’s particularity requirement and is contrary to copious precedent,” said Magistrate Judge Gabriel Gorenstein, who wrote the opinion. Multiple courts have concluded on-site searches of hard drives are difficult and warrants have allowed for the government to remove hard drives to conduct information searches. “We perceive no constitutionally significant difference between the searches of hard drives just discussed and searches of email accounts,” Gorenstein said. “Indeed, in many cases, the data in an email account will be less expansive than the information that is typically contained on a hard drive.” The D.C. and Kansas rulings are outliers to the larger body of legal precedent, he said. “If the Government acts improperly in its retention of the materials, our judicial system provides remedies,” Gorenstein said. “We recognize that the Government has a need to retain materials as an investigation unfolds for the purpose of retrieving material that is authorized by the warrant.” American Civil Liberties Union Legislative Director Christopher Calabrese said the court’s explanation allows for an invasive government. “The case highlights the danger of allowing civil agencies to have some type access to our emails directly from the service provider,” he said by email. “The result will be that these agencies will have full access to our email inboxes, potentially in response to the most trivial civil violations of the law.” The ACLU, privacy advocates and conservative-leaning groups have been pushing for Congress to pass a law requiring the government to obtain a warrant before accessing a user’s email, which it currently is not required to do under all circumstances (CD July 14 p9).