Texas Senate Bill SB1694

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

Caption

Relating to the use of a mobile tracking device without a court order in the course of a criminal investigation.

Impact

If enacted, SB1694 would significantly alter the landscape of privacy rights in relation to criminal investigations. By enabling law enforcement to utilize mobile tracking technology without a court order, the bill could enhance the efficiency of investigations. However, this capability raises concerns about potential violations of individual privacy rights and the balance between effective policing and civil liberties. The implications are particularly significant in light of ongoing discussions regarding privacy in the digital age.

Summary

SB1694 amends the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure to allow for the installation and use of mobile tracking devices without the need for a court order during criminal investigations. The bill specifically adds a new subsection to Section 14, Article 18.21, clarifying that such actions are permitted when not explicitly prohibited by the Texas Constitution or the United States Constitution. This legislative move aims to provide law enforcement with greater flexibility in tracking and apprehending suspects, potentially streamlining investigative processes.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB1694 is mixed. Proponents argue that the bill is necessary for modern law enforcement to effectively combat crime in a rapidly evolving technological environment. They believe that removing the court order requirement allows for quicker action, which can prevent crime or catch suspects more effectively. In contrast, opponents express concerns about overreach and the erosion of privacy rights, fearing that this could lead to abuses of power and unwarranted surveillance without judicial oversight.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential for misuse of mobile tracking devices and the implications for personal privacy. Critics of the bill argue that allowing law enforcement to bypass court orders raises serious legal and ethical questions, particularly regarding the protection of citizens' rights. The debate highlights a fundamental tension between the need for efficient law enforcement tools and the necessity of safeguarding constitutional protections against unwarranted intrusion into private lives.