Judge William Pauley determined that evidence obtained from StingRay surveillance in the case against Raymond Lambis was ruled inadmissible, highlighting the need for warrants in privacy violations.
Privacy advocates argue that StingRay technology's use without warrants is a significant threat to constitutional rights, revealing a growing concern over surveillance practices by federal agencies.
The case marks a noteworthy moment in legal precedent, as it challenges the increasingly common practice of law enforcement using advanced surveillance technology without judicial oversight.
Despite potential benefits in law enforcement, the unchecked use of devices like StingRay has raised alarms, particularly among civil liberties organizations, pushing for stricter regulations.
[
Collection
]
[
|
...
]