2218
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
2218 points (97.9% liked)
Technology
34448 readers
601 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Obligatory IANAL, but...
Generally a search warrant needs to be issued by a local authority, and that requires the crime to be prosecutable in the place where it was issued.
So in theory, California is potentially able to refuse requests to search for things that are not illegal in California but may be illegal somewhere else.
That being said, it looks like there are specific practices in place making it easier to issue warrants for electronic data like this scenario, even across state lines.
And in this particular circumstance, the alleged offense is even illegal in California (abortion of a viable fetus), so it's a bit of a moot point anyways. A Californian judge would have issued this warrant if a local police department requested one.