HIGH COURT EASES CURBS ON BUGGING; ADDS SAFECUARD; Insists Police Must Obtain Warrant to Act--Doesn't Forbid Eavesdropping BETTING CASE REVERSED Justices Hold Phone Booth User Is Protected Against Unauthorized Snooping Must Request Warrant HIGH COURT EASES CURBS ON BUGGING Both Sides Gain Privacy Right Upheld Early Impression Changed
US Sup Ct, 7-1, rules electronic bugging with legal warrants const, C Katz case; extends 4th amendment by holding that warrant procedure must be followed by police officers even for use in semipub places such as phone booths; cancels '42 precedent that data from bugging could be used in ct so long as no physical trespass was involved in installation of device; says such trespass is not decisive point; stresses police must get warrant approving surveillance if Listening device is to be used; majority decision written by Justice Stewart; Justice Black, dissenter, holds 4th amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures does not apply to eavesdropping; new ruling erases impression created by June decision, Berger v NY, that requirement for elaborate warrant procedures would make bugging useless; effect of decision seen ltd until states adopt laws covering grants of bugging warrants
