Skip to content
TopicTracker
From daringfireball.netView original ↗
TranslationTranslation

★ The Supreme Court Rules That Law Enforcement’s Use of ‘Geofence Warrant’ Was a ‘Search’ (But May Be Moot, Technically, Since 2024)

The Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement's use of a 'geofence warrant' constitutes a 'search'. However, the ruling may be technically moot because Google no longer collects data in a way that allows such warrants, and Apple never did.

Background

- Geofence warrants allow police to force Google or other tech companies to reveal all accounts whose location data fell within a certain geographic area during a specific time window — effectively a digital dragnet that sweeps up data from innocent bystanders along with suspects. - The Supreme Court held that requesting such a warrant constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment, triggering legal protections. The ruling came too late to affect Google's data collection practices: Google stopped storing location history on users' devices in 2024, making geofence warrants unworkable against it. - Apple never collected location data in a way that made iPhones susceptible to geofence warrants, so it was never affected by the practice. - John Gruber (Daring Fireball author) is a longtime Apple commentator. His piece highlights the practical irony: the legal question is settled, but the technical landscape has already rendered it irrelevant.

Related stories

  • Justices say Constitution protects people's location history

    9.0

    The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protects individuals' location history, requiring police to obtain a warrant before accessing cellphone location data. The decision marks a significant expansion of digital privacy rights in the context of modern technology.

  • Supreme Court says constitution protects people's location data

    9.0

    The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protects people's location data, requiring law enforcement to obtain a warrant before accessing cell phone location records from third parties like phone companies. The decision marks a major privacy victory, recognizing that long-term tracking of a person's movements violates reasonable expectations of privacy.

  • SCOTUS Decision: Law Enforcement's Use of 'Geofence Warrant' Was a 'Search'

    9.0

    The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement's use of a "geofence warrant" to obtain location data from Google constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment, requiring probable cause and a warrant. The decision curtails the ability of police to demand tech companies for anonymous location data of everyone near a crime scene without individualized suspicion.

  • Supreme Court rules geofence warrants are protected by privacy rights

    9.0

    The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that geofence warrants are subject to Fourth Amendment privacy protections, requiring police to get a warrant based on probable cause. The decision restricts law enforcement from demanding bulk location data from tech companies for all devices near a crime scene.