I guess I don't get the distinction in the comparison. Let me lay out a simple example:
a. I hold a picture on my mobile phone. I transmit this picture using the phone's built in radio to a friend of mine.
b. I hold a picture on my laptop. I transmit the picture to a friend using my internet connection provided by my ISP.
I get that the government cannot access my phone and pull the picture from it (that would be a warrantless search of both my person and my effects). However, once I send the picture into the world, why does it matter whether I used an undersea cable or a communication satellite or a carrier pidgin? If the Supreme Court rules that neither my phone nor any communication to/from it may be searched without a warrant, then it should follow almost immediately that the same rules should apply to any consumer communication device, no?
Edit: in both cases above, let's assume that my friend is not a US citizen and is not located in the US.
a. I hold a picture on my mobile phone. I transmit this picture using the phone's built in radio to a friend of mine.
b. I hold a picture on my laptop. I transmit the picture to a friend using my internet connection provided by my ISP.
I get that the government cannot access my phone and pull the picture from it (that would be a warrantless search of both my person and my effects). However, once I send the picture into the world, why does it matter whether I used an undersea cable or a communication satellite or a carrier pidgin? If the Supreme Court rules that neither my phone nor any communication to/from it may be searched without a warrant, then it should follow almost immediately that the same rules should apply to any consumer communication device, no?
Edit: in both cases above, let's assume that my friend is not a US citizen and is not located in the US.