If they would have established that my IP address was on that site (which they did not, because it wasn't) it still probably wouldn't have solved the general warrant problem.
This "Any and all computers, as defined in 720 ILCS 5/16D-2; any and all magnetic or optical media, including but not limited to hard disk drives, floppy disks, compact discs, DVDs, USB devices, and any and all passwords or other computer security devices, and any and all information and data stored in the form of magnetic or electronic coding on computer media or on media capable of being read by a computer or with the aid of computer equipment, any and all computer software, any and all evidence, data or information pertaining to the possession including but not limited to: any and all evidence of dominion and control over the computer," is sole broad is scope and allows the search and seize anything that's what makes it a general warrant.
In Riley v California (2014) the US Supreme court stated that computers have more protection than wallets and purses because a computer can hold a vast amount of personal and private information, more than a wallet, purse or even the home. So, computers have more protection than wallets and purses, and a warrant has to be tailored to specify what they are exactly looking for.
As Chief Justice Roberts said:
" Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans “the privacies of life". The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought."
the case Riley v California was about cellphones which the US Supreme court stated was nothing more than "micro-computers"
This "Any and all computers, as defined in 720 ILCS 5/16D-2; any and all magnetic or optical media, including but not limited to hard disk drives, floppy disks, compact discs, DVDs, USB devices, and any and all passwords or other computer security devices, and any and all information and data stored in the form of magnetic or electronic coding on computer media or on media capable of being read by a computer or with the aid of computer equipment, any and all computer software, any and all evidence, data or information pertaining to the possession including but not limited to: any and all evidence of dominion and control over the computer," is sole broad is scope and allows the search and seize anything that's what makes it a general warrant.
In Riley v California (2014) the US Supreme court stated that computers have more protection than wallets and purses because a computer can hold a vast amount of personal and private information, more than a wallet, purse or even the home. So, computers have more protection than wallets and purses, and a warrant has to be tailored to specify what they are exactly looking for.
As Chief Justice Roberts said:
" Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans “the privacies of life". The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought."
the case Riley v California was about cellphones which the US Supreme court stated was nothing more than "micro-computers"