It is very easy to see how this investigative technique is ripe for abuse and for further eroding our civil liberties. Ironically, in the Jones case, FBI agents did actually get approval for a warrant to use the GPS tracking device on Mr. Jones' car; however, they didn't bother to install it until the day after the warrant expired. I guess it couldn't have been that much of a burden on the government to get a warrant first, after all, if they didn't even make installing the device a priority. I will update this entry after the Supreme Court rules.
My prediction is that the Supreme Court will rule that the scope of surveillance and information collected requires a warrant. Feel free to add your prediction in the comments section.
Legal disclaimer: All answers are for information purposes only. Answering this question or any future questions does not form any attorney-client relationship. Be mindful, that answers are limited by the limited facts presented by the questioner and are not meant to take the place of competent legal advice by an attorney fully informed of all the facts surrounding your case. However, be aware that nothing posted in a public forum such as this can be deemed confidential or privileged communication. For a privileged private consultation, contact me at 212-385-8600 or via my website www.reasonabledoubtny.com