You can get dragged into a police investigation by proximity alone — for now
The Supreme Court recently heard arguments in Chatrie v. United States, a case challenging the use of geofence warrants that allow police to obtain location data from tech companies for all devices in a specific area during a certain time. Okello Chatrie was identified as a suspect in a 2019 bank robbery after police obtained his Google Maps location history through such a warrant, raising Fourth Amendment concerns about privacy and unreasonable search. Although Google discontinued storing location history in the cloud in 2024, the ruling could have broad implications for digital privacy and law enforcement's use of reverse location searches.
- ▪Police used a geofence warrant to obtain data from Google on all devices near a bank during a 2019 robbery, leading them to suspect Okello Chatrie.
- ▪Chatrie's legal team argues the geofence warrant violated the Fourth Amendment because it amounted to an unreasonable search without probable cause.
- ▪While Google no longer stores location history in the cloud, other companies like Uber, Lyft, and Snap continue to collect user location data, making the case relevant beyond Google's former practices.
- ▪A federal appeals court ruled that the Fourth Amendment was not violated because Chatrie voluntarily shared his data with Google, a point central to the Supreme Court's deliberation.
- ▪Some justices expressed skepticism about the case's relevance due to changes in Google's data policies, but advocates warn the outcome could affect a wide range of digital privacy issues.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
ReportCloseReportPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All ReportPolicyClosePolicyPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All PolicyTechCloseTechPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All TechYou can get dragged into a police investigation by proximity alone — for now The Supreme Court will soon rule on the legality of controversial ‘geofence warrants.’ The Supreme Court will soon rule on the legality of controversial ‘geofence warrants.’by Gaby Del ValleCloseGaby Del VallePolicy ReporterPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Gaby…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Verge.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Verge
