Innovative or Unconstitutional?

Earlier this week, The Wall Street Journal released an article detailing the Justice Department (DOJ)'s newest criminal surveillance method: aerial phone tracking. Essentially, a small black box on the plane (called a dirtbox) mimics a cell phone tower so that the target's cell phone will connect to the plane instead of a real tower. Once connected, the dirtbox collects information from the phone that identifies the owner and, most importantly, gives their location (within approximately 10 feet).

While the DOJ neither refuses nor denies the existence of this program, it could prove to be either a very positive method or a very negative one. If the suspect is indeed carrying their phone, it would allow law enforcement officials to be 100% sure of the suspect's location, when they wouldn't have been able to before. But at the same time, if the suspect figures out that he/she has been tracked, he/she could set the officers up, potentially putting them in a very dangerous, life-threatening situation. On top of this risk, the announcement has created a controversy among a plethora of civil rights groups.

Many groups are arguing that since this device reportedly collects the personal data of thousands of Americans (without their consent) while searching for its one suspect, it is in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Despite these claims, the DOJ maintains that "all federal investigations are consistent with federal law and are subject to court approval," adding that the dirtbox does not save any information that does not pertain to its current investigation.

If this report is accurate and this program is currently in action, should it be shut down on the grounds of unconstitutionality and overall risk? Or is it worth it because it might have the potential to greatly advance law enforcement efficiency?