Overview
- The Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in Chatrie v. United States over whether police ‘geofence’ warrants violate the Fourth Amendment.
- Geofence warrants tell tech firms to search stored location records for all devices in a defined place and time, starting with anonymous dots and narrowing to account identities through follow-up requests.
- Government lawyers argued that users who turn on location tracking lack a privacy expectation in those records and said blocking the tool would hinder probes of robberies, kidnappings, and shootings.
- Several justices looked for narrow rules rather than a blanket ban and pressed about dragnet risks, including revealing who visited churches, clinics, or political events.
- Google told the Court it has resisted thousands of such demands and now keeps Location History on users’ devices, yet other companies still store location data, and a decision expected by late June could set national rules.