UPDATED: Mar 13, 2020
It’s all about you. We want to help you make the right coverage choices.
Advertiser Disclosure: We strive to help you make confident insurance decisions. Comparison shopping should be easy. We partner with top insurance providers. This doesn't influence our content. Our opinions are our own.
Editorial Guidelines: We are a free online resource for anyone interested in learning more about car insurance. Our goal is to be an objective, third-party resource for everything car insurance related. We update our site regularly, and all content is reviewed by car insurance experts.
When you consider the impact GPS has had on driving, it’s easy to see that it’s had a large effect on the way we drive. Starting off as separate devices drivers could install in their automobiles, they’ve quickly made their way into becoming installed by auto manufacturers as either standard or optional equipment. And with each successive model year, there are more and more cars on the road equipped with on-board GPS navigation systems.
We’ve talked in the past about how such systems can do more harm than good, since they can serve as a significant driver distraction. Not extremely interesting, but a case currently before the Supreme Court of the United States, involving a different type of GPS and automobiles, has certainly grabbed our attention.
The case itself is the United States v. Antoine Jones. The details surrounding the case involved the tossing out a conviction on drug conspiracy on Antoine Jones of Maryland. In his case, government agents put a self-contained GPS device that allowed authorities to track where Jones drove. That tracking allowed the government to conduct a secret investigation of Jones’ activities and was used to compile evidence used to initially convict Jones.
That conviction was overturned since the same FBI agents that conducted the investigation and installed the GPS unit on Jones’ car didn’t have a search warrant. The Obama administration is arguing that police have no requirement to obtain a warrant, since they don’t consider the electronic tracking a search.
The government’s argument seemed to stun Chief Justice John Roberts, who asked the Justice Department’s lawyer “so your answer is yes, you could tomorrow decide that you put a GPS device on every one of our cars, follow us for a month; no problem under the Constitution?”
While we don’t expect a decision to be handed down on this case until June, 2012, we’d love to know your thoughts. So we’ll go ahead and ask each of you this question: Should police be able to install a GPS device on your car to track your movements without a search warrant?