{"id":4814,"date":"2010-10-24T14:23:34","date_gmt":"2010-10-24T14:23:08","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-10-24T14:23:08","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4814","title":{"rendered":"News: Trucking industry to resist mandatory black box recording truck movements; new regulations 6\/1\/12"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>From Truckinginfo.com, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.truckinginfo.com\/news\/news-detail.asp?news_id=72009&amp;news_category_id=3\">Owner-Operator Group Challenges EOBR Rule<\/a>, partly on Fourth Amendment grounds of government surveillance of realtime movements of big trucks:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association filed a petition seeking review of the final rule mandating electronic on-board recorders for motor carriers with chronic noncompliance with hours-of-service regulations.<\/p>\n<p>The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration earlier this year <a href=\"http:\/\/www.truckinginfo.com\/news\/news-detail.asp?news_id=69964\">issued a final rule, which will go into effect June 1, 2012<\/a>, requiring carriers that violate hours of service rules 10 percent of the time, based on single compliance review, to use electronic onboard recorders to track driver hours.<\/p>\n<p>The association&#8217;s core argument against mandating &#8220;black boxes&#8221; is that there is no proof the devices can accurately and automatically record a driver&#8217;s hours of service and duty status. An EOBR can only track the movement and location of a truck; it requires human interaction to record any change of duty status.<\/p>\n<p>. . .<\/p>\n<p>Another argument against the use of the electronic on-board tracking devices centers on the Fourth Amendment.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The real-time, government mandated, 24-hour electronic surveillance of a driver&#8217;s location and movements contemplated by the (notice of proposed rulemaking) is an unjustified and dangerous intrusion on drivers&#8217; right of privacy,&#8221; the brief states.<\/p>\n<p>The constitutional argument states that the constant monitoring constitutes a search of the driver within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4814\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4814","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4814","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4814"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4814\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4814"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4814"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4814"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}