Supreme Court Unanimously Rules Police Can't Search Smartphones Without a Warrant '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 [America's] founders fought.'

By Geoff Weiss

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

The Supreme Court's ruling yesterday that police must obtain warrants in order to search citizens' cellphones marks a bold support of privacy in a blurring digital era, and also provides a stunning glimpse into the trove of personal data typically found within such devices.

The unanimous ruling "almost certainly also applies to searches of tablet and laptop computers," reports The New York Times. And in addition to arrests, it may also "apply to searches of homes and businesses and information held by third parties like phone companies."

In the ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts explains how smartphones paint a remarkably holistic picture of our daily whereabouts, interests and habits. (12 percent of Americans even use their devices in the shower, he noted.)

"Even the word cellphone is a misnomer," Roberts wrote. "They could just as easily be called cameras, video players, Rolodexes, calendars, tape recorders, libraries, diaries, albums, televisions, maps or newspapers."

Related: Aereo Loses Supreme Court Case, Streaming TV Service Deemed Illegal

But just because we rely heavily on these mobile devices does not mean they should be any less protected than our homes or cars. "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 [America's] founders fought."

The ruling comes as a major blow to government agencies, who have argued that warrantless searches ensure both protection and security of evidence. But Roberts wasn't taking the bait. "Once an officer has secured a phone and eliminated any potential physical threats," he wrote, "data on the phone can endanger no one."

He did state that officers have the right to secure a cellphone, remove the battery and place it in an aluminum bag to stop any sort of remote connection. And he also noted that if officers are in a "now or never" situation, they can search the phone under a clause within the Fourth Amendment that covers "exigent circumstances."

The ruling can be read in full right here.

Related: This Startup Aims to Warn You About Spying Drones

Geoff Weiss

Former Staff Writer

Geoff Weiss is a former staff writer at Entrepreneur.com.

Want to be an Entrepreneur Leadership Network contributor? Apply now to join.

Business Ideas

70 Small Business Ideas to Start in 2025

We put together a list of the best, most profitable small business ideas for entrepreneurs to pursue in 2025.

Business News

'I Love Doing Product Reviews': Bill Gates Stepped Down from Microsoft in 2020, But Admits He Still Spends 15% of His Time Working at the Company

In a new interview with the Wall Street Journal, Gates also said he is still close with Microsoft's CEO Satya Nadella.

Franchise

Franchise Models Explained — How to Choose the Right One for Your Goals

Navigating the franchise world starts with understanding key business models. Here's how project-based and subscription franchises differ in investment, scalability, and recession resistance.

Business News

Elon Musk's DOGE Is Hiring People Eager to 'Work Long Hours' to Eliminate 'Waste, Fraud and Abuse' in the Government. Here's How to Apply.

The Department of Government Efficiency is hiring U.S. citizens to help cut spending and headcounts in the federal government.

Business News

Uber's CEO Says Drivers Have About 10 Years Left Before They Will Be Replaced

Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi says the jobs of human drivers are safe for the next decade, but after that, another type of driver will take over.

Business News

'Everyone Can Profit From It': What Is DeepSeek? China's 'Cheap' to Make AI Chatbot Climbs to the Top of Apple, Google U.S. App Stores

DeepSeek researchers claim it was developed for less than $6 million, a contrast to the $100 million it takes U.S. tech startups to create AI.