Access to a stored communication is taken to be under an interception warrant if, and only if, the warrant would have authorised interception of the communication if it were still passing over a telecommunications system (s108(3)).
1 IOS Press, 2008).  2 The connection between the data and the conclusion is created by something called a ' warrant .' One of the important points made by Toulmin is that the warrant is a kind of inference rule, and in particular not a statement of facts.. ( 3 Jaap C. Hage, Reasoning With Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning. 1 The warrant functions as a bridge between the data and the claim. . . .  2 Toulmin expresses the difference between data and warrant as follows: [ . . .] data are appealed to explicitly, warrants implicitly. Interception warrants issued to ASIO may also permit access to stored communications (s109). Interception warrants issued to ASIO may be in force for a period up to maximum of 6 months, unless it is a 'B-Party' warrant (see below), in which case the maximum is up to 3 months (s9B). Issuers of Stored Communications Warrants. Stored communications warrants are able to be issued by the same issuing authorities as interception warrants (i.e. eligible judges and nominated AAT members) and are also able to be issued by any other Commonwealth, State or Territory judge or magistrate. Privacy: electronic communications: search warrant. (1) Existing law provides that a search warrant may only be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. 1 Access to a stored communication is taken to be under an interception warrant if, and only if, the warrant would have authorised interception of the communication if it were still passing over a telecommunications system (s108(3)). Issuers of Stored Communications Warrants. Stored communications warrants are able to be issued by the same issuing authorities as interception warrants (i.e. eligible judges and nominated AAT members) and are also able to be issued by any other Commonwealth, State or Territory judge or magistrate. 12 INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS (b) if satisfied that a renewal of the warrant is justified in any particular case, renew the warrant for such period as he may specify therein (in this section referred to as the first renewal period) not exceeding ninety days from the date of expiration of the initial period. (3) Subsection (2) shall not apply to the disclosure of the contents of any communication obtained by means of a warrant which is made, in any criminal proceedings, to a person charged with an offence or to the attorney-at-law representing that person in those proceedings. I am in law enforcement in Alabama and helping my parents handle this situation. It is much easier in Alabama to obtaina warrant for harassment communication. She is calling the house phone, cell phone, sending text messages all hours of the day and night. My parents have called their phone provider to help weed out her calls but she is using a spoof card to get around them.  1 Accessing a stored communication under an interception warrant (s108(2)(b). 2  Access to a stored communication is taken to be under an interception warrant if, and only if, the warrant would have authorised interception of the communication if it were still passing over a telecommunications system (s108(3)). Issuers of Stored Communications Warrants. Stored communications warrants are able to be issued by the same issuing authorities as interception warrants (i.e. eligible judges and nominated AAT members) and are also able to be issued by any other Commonwealth, State or Territory judge or magistrate. 1 The connection between the data and the conclusion is created by something called a ' warrant .' One of the important points made by Toulmin is that the warrant is a kind of inference rule, and in particular not a statement of facts.. ( 2 Jaap C. Hage, Reasoning With Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning. 3  Springer, 1997). 1 The warrant functions as a bridge between the data and the claim. . . .  2 Toulmin expresses the difference between data and warrant as follows: [ . . .] data are appealed to explicitly, warrants implicitly. Lawful interception (LI) is obtaining communications network data pursuant to lawful authority for the purpose of analysis or evidence. Such data generally consist of signalling or network management information or, in fewer instances, the content of the communications. If the data are not obtained in real-time, the activity is referred to as access to retained data (RD). There are many bases for this activity that include infrastructure protection and cybersecurity. In general, the operator of public network infrastructure can undertake LI activities for those purposes
http://grammar.about.com/od/tz/g/warrantterm.htm https://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Privacy/tia.html http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB178 https://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Privacy/tia.html http://oas.org/juridico/spanish/cyb_jam_intercep_commun_act.pdf http://www.justanswer.com/criminal-law/7mtgx-obtain-warrant-harassment-communication.html https://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Privacy/tia.html http://grammar.about.com/od/tz/g/warrantterm.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception
what is a communication warrant