California Cops Now Allowed to Search Your Cell Phone; Are There Any Rights Our Country Holds Sacred?

Privacy definitely isn't one of them.

After all, we live in a nation where criminals get a slap on the wrist for spying on people (read: women) by hacking into their computers' web cameras. So why should we be surprised that a California Appellate court has ruled that police officers can search our cell phones during a traffic violation stop?

has the full (nauseating) story, in which a close-minded court ruled against our right to privacy by saying that deputies have “unqualified authority” to search our possessions, including our cell phones. “It is up to the US Supreme Court to impose any greater limits on officers' authority to search incident to arrest,” the court ruled. What the heck is wrong with this court? While I support the police and their right to examine a suspicious situation (and, more importantly, their right to protect themselves from danger), I cannot support what this court has done. It has single-handedly given police more power than they should have in a way that will ultimately violate the rights of the innocent. Meanwhile, technicalities will continue to let real criminals go free. Technicalities and politics aside, what do the police hope to accomplish with this ruling? I am 100% against drunk driving. I am 100% in favor of harsher laws against drunk driving. But when a guy gets pulled over for being drunk, what business do the police have checking his phone? Did the fact that he texted an ex-girlfriend that same night make the police's case any stronger? Did the voice mail he received from his friend make him any less sober? Did the e-mails he answered, deleted and completely ignored make him more likely to receive the harshest punishment possible and never, ever drink again? What about the men and women who are stopped for speeding, running stop signs, or passing through traffic lights as they change from yellow to red? Do their

make the crime any more significant? No, they don't. Some are bound to argue that police may want to check your phone to see if you were texting while driving. That's a nice thought, and I certainly support the right for police to hand out tickets to drivers who break this law (in states where you can't legally text while driving, that is). But since a police officer can't legally give you a ticket because he

you were speeding, and since he can't legally give you a ticket because he

you ran a red light, why should he have the right to check your phone, even if he legitimately thinks you were texting? If the officer didn't actually see you texting while driving, he should not be allowed to give you a ticket – it's that simple. Besides, how can a text message that the cop views

the incident truly prove that the driver was texting while driving? Are we supposed to rely on a cell phone's time stamp to prove that he was texting? What court would uphold a ticket that was given out in such a frivolous matter? Perhaps the same court that rules in favor of these absurd searches. Hooray for hypocrisy. Hooray for our lack of privacy. Hooray for lawyers who shout “rights!” and “freedom!” but are nowhere to be found when we need them most. Hooray for judges who use the Supreme Court as an excuse for not imposing greater limits on police officers' authority. Hooray for those same kinds of judges who let real criminals walk free because of silly technicalities. Hooray, hooray, hooray.