Rhetorical Analysis Of Cell Phones

Words: 1089
Pages: 5

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. pointed out during the Supreme Court Case, Riley vs California, “[Cell Phones] are now such a pervasive and insistent part of daily life that the proverbial visitor from Mars might conclude they were an important feature of human anatomy” (Liptak). On June 25, 2014, the Supreme Court decided that police would no longer be able to search a cell phone without a warrant. The petitioner used several rhetorical appeals to convince the Supreme Court that a warrant-less search of a cell phone would be breaking one's fourth amendment rights. They used these rhetorical appeals to counter the respondent , the State of California's argument of, “police officers need to be able to confiscate cell phones without first obtaining a warrant for safety reasons and to prevent destruction of evidence” (Bensur). The petitioner made his argument effective by using ethos throughout their case. One prime example was using ethos to point out that limitation does not protect our constitutional rights. The petitioner also used logos as they referred back to the facts of other cases and our Constitution. Finally, the petitioner strengthened their argument by pointing out that information found on a cell phone today was not capable of being on a cell phone until the creation of smart phones. First, the petitioner, David Riley, was able to make a strong point by the use of ethos. He explained how less extreme rules about searching cell phone would not protect our constitutional rights. By only giving police limitations, they are still …show more content…
Riley references the first and fourth amendment of the United State's Constitution. Riley is also backed up by another case, United States v.Wurie. Also, both Riley and the State of California referenced several previous court cases including, People v. Diaz and United States v.