The US Supreme Court limited the use of geofencing warrants, sending a case back to determine if the search was 'reasonable' under the Fourth Amendment, citing concerns over mass surveillance and privacy.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case examining whether police can obtain cell phone location data from Google without violating Fourth Amendment rights. The case stems from a bank robbery investigation where police used geofencing to identify suspects. Both conservative and liberal justices expressed concerns about the implications for privacy, with Justice Barrett noting users likely don't understand how their data is stored.
The Supreme Court heard arguments on whether geofencing warrants—allowing police to demand Google identify all users within a crime scene area—are constitutional. The case stems from a 2019 Virginia bank robbery where police obtained a warrant for location data on roughly three football fields around the bank, ultimately identifying Okello Chatrie. The government argues users who opted into Google's location history waived privacy expectations, while defense contends this amounts to a dragnet search violating the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches.
Police in Virginia used geofencing—drawing a virtual perimeter around a bank robbery scene and demanding Google identify any users within it—to solve a $195,000 heist in Midlothian. The technique is now before the U.S. Supreme Court, which must decide whether this warrantless-style data search violates the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches.
