Policymakers must ensure that the privacy pendulum does not swing so far that public safety is compromised

But Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), said his organization—a longtime supporter of privacy rights—supports the use of technologies like StarChase instead of high-speed chases when used properly.

“We don’t really think it would violate the Fourth Amendment to install a GPS tracker in the heat of a police chase when someone is evading a lawful stop,” Stanley said during an interview with IWCE’s Urgent Communications. “If obtaining a warrant is dangerous or impractical, then a warrantless search can be permitted.”

Last week, the Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement cannot search the contents of a cell phone without a warrant, except in “exigent” circumstances—when swift action needs to be taken to prevent imminent danger to life or serious property damage. I spoke with Stanley weeks before the cell-phone decision was announced, but his sentiment was that the exigent-circumstances exception should apply to many technological privacy questions, including the use of GPS tracking and StarChase, in particular.

Stanley said that the ACLU and most courts do not support the use of GPS tracking of a suspect or suspect vehicle for extended periods of time, but using a technology like StarChase in exigent circumstances should be allowed by courts and would be supported by the ACLU.

“I think the context of that [case in Arizona] was the deliberate placing of a GPS on a vehicle for the purpose of extended tracking,” Stanley said. “I would be surprised if a court applied that same reasoning to a tracker used in the heat of a chase. Because, if somebody’s evading the police, they’re already engaged in wrongdoing, and the police officer obviously doesn’t have time to get a warrant.”

In terms of other public-safety technologies, the ACLU also supports the notion of police officers using wearable cameras, which can record what an officer sees during an incident or investigation, Stanley said.

“We actually like the police wearable cameras,” he said. "It serves as a good check on the police. We don’t want the government watching people, when it doesn’t have reason to suspect them of wrongdoing, but we do think that people should be able to monitor their government and its officials.

“Police officers have a lot of power, so any technology that can help monitor their power and how they use it can be a good thing.”