{"id":2595535,"date":"2026-04-27T07:38:02","date_gmt":"2026-04-27T11:38:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/key-law-enforcement-search-tool-faces-supreme-court-scrutiny\/"},"modified":"2026-04-27T07:41:01","modified_gmt":"2026-04-27T11:41:01","slug":"key-law-enforcement-search-tool-faces-supreme-court-scrutiny","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/key-law-enforcement-search-tool-faces-supreme-court-scrutiny\/","title":{"rendered":"Key law enforcement search tool faces Supreme Court scrutiny"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"float:left\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">18<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fkey-law-enforcement-search-tool-faces-supreme-court-scrutiny%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2595535&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in **Chatrie v. United States**, focusing on whether **geofence warrants**-requests that use location-data technology to identify devices within a specific area during a set time-violate the **Fourth Amendment**.<\/p>\n<p>the government argues the warrant is constitutional because it targets location data that a person effectively \u201cassumed the risk\u201d of sharing, and it went through a required review process with a magistrate judge. In Chatrie\u2019s case, the data helped link him to a **bank robbery**, leading to his conviction.<\/p>\n<p>Chatrie argues the approach is unconstitutional because it functions like a **\u201csearch first, develop suspicions later\u201d** method: instead of targeting an individual, it compels the search of **all accounts** with location history enabled within the geofenced zone, potentially offering the government sweeping access. He also warns that geofence boundaries could be drawn around sensitive locations to enable broad surveillance.<\/p>\n<p>Google, which provided the data, does not take sides on the ultimate outcome but urges the Court to recognize that **remotely stored location data** shoudl receive Fourth Amendment protection, and that warrants should be more **individualized** rather than blanket.<\/p>\n<p>The Court\u2019s decision is expected by the end of June, and it comes as the justices increasingly address modern, technology-driven evidence-building on prior rulings such as **Carpenter v. United states** regarding <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/a-look-at-the-suspect-who-tried-to-assassinate-brett-kavanaugh-trans-gamer-girl\/\" title=\"A Look at the Suspect Who Tried to Assassinate Brett Kavanaugh: \u201cTrans Gamer Girl\u201d\">cell tower data<\/a>.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<article class=\"fn-body\">\n<p>The <a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/supreme-court\/\" type=\"post_tag\" id=\"203\">Supreme Court<\/a> will consider the constitutionality of a key <a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/police-and-law-enforcement\/\" type=\"post_tag\" id=\"401\">law enforcement<\/a> tool that has grown in significance in recent years alongside the growth of location-enabled devices: geofence warrants.<\/p>\n<p>The justices will hear arguments on Monday in <em><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/4422327\/supreme-court-determine-legality-geofence-warrants\/\" type=\"link\" id=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/4422327\/supreme-court-determine-legality-geofence-warrants\/\">Chatrie v. United States<\/a><\/em>, which will examine Okello Chatrie\u2019s claim that the Justice Department\u2019s use of a geofence <a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/warrants\/\" type=\"post_tag\" id=\"4704\">warrant<\/a> violates the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The arguments will put the emerging technological law enforcement tool under the microscope, and the high court\u2019s decision in the case could limit a tool that has been at the center of various criminal investigations across the country.<\/p>\n<section class=\"explore-more-section\" id=\"wex-recommended-widget\">\n<div class=\"magazine-container single\">\n<h1 class=\"magazine-title mt-2\">Recommended Stories<\/h1>\n<p>             <i class=\"fa-solid fa-play icon\"><\/i>         <\/div>\n<div class=\"explore-grid\">\n<div class=\"explore-card\">                         <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/4540303\/supreme-court-sitting-key-second-amendment-cases\/?itm_source=parsely-api\">                             <\/p>\n<div class=\"explore-thumb-wrap\">                                                                                                                                  <\/div>\n<h3>Supreme Court sitting on several key Second Amendment cases<\/h3>\n<p>                         <\/a>                     <\/div>\n<div class=\"explore-card\">                         <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/4538712\/supreme-court-asks-criminal-legal-immigrants-be-denied-entry-in-us\/?itm_source=parsely-api\">                             <\/p>\n<div class=\"explore-thumb-wrap\">                                                                                                                                  <\/div>\n<h3>Supreme Court grapples with if criminal legal immigrants may be denied entry in the US<\/h3>\n<p>                         <\/a>                     <\/div>\n<div class=\"explore-card\">                         <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/4537015\/supreme-court-grills-fcc-authority-impose-fines-att-verizon\/?itm_source=parsely-api\">                             <\/p>\n<div class=\"explore-thumb-wrap\">                                                                                                                                  <\/div>\n<h3>Supreme Court grills FCC over its authority to impose fines on AT&#038;T and Verizon<\/h3>\n<p>                         <\/a>                     <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<p>A geofence warrant is a request made by the government to a technology company, such as Google, in this case, for information about devices that were physically within a certain geographic parameter during a certain period of time. The data from the geofence warrant used in Chatrie\u2019s case was able to connect him to a bank robbery, for which he was convicted. <\/p>\n<div class=\"article-paywall\">\n<p>The DOJ argued to the high court in its brief that there is not a violation of constitutional rights \u201cfrom the discovery of two hours of public movements,\u201d especially for a service that Chatrie opted into sharing his location and other information with. The brief also noted that to obtain the warrant, it needed to go through a three-step process with a magistrate judge.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe Court has made clear that an individual lacks a reasonable expectation of privacy in information that he \u2018assumed the risk\u2019 of sharing with others, including about his short-term public movements,\u201d the DOJ brief said. \u201cThe warrant here sought movement information visible to anyone near petitioner when he robbed the credit union, and the inquiry it specified was closely analogous to what Google itself regularly did with opting-in users\u2019 recorded Location History.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The DOJ also argued that Chatrie\u2019s position would \u201cseem to imply that no geofence warrant, of any sort, could ever be executed,\u201d and urged the justices to uphold the constitutionality of such warrants.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cHis path to that counterintuitive result requires a number of novel Fourth Amendment innovations and would push the Court far out ahead of legislatures and common-law courts, where complex issues \u2014 such as questions about ownership of personal data, contract law on the Internet, and the proper boundary lines of online privacy\u2014are still being debated and developed,\u201d the DOJ brief said.<\/p>\n<p>Chatrie told the high court it should rule against the DOJ\u2019s scheme for obtaining broad swaths of data via geofence warrants, claiming it is the sort of \u201csearch first and develop suspicions later\u201d policy the Fourth Amendment was designed to eliminate.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cA geofence warrant operates on precisely that principle,\u201d Chatrie\u2019s brief said. \u201cTo find the few people near a crime scene, the government compels a search of every account with Location History enabled \u2014 millions of people, all over the country, whose private digital papers must be searched so that the government can identify who was where and when.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe potential for abuse is breathtaking: the government need only draw a geofence around a church, a political rally, or a gun shop, and it can compel a search of every user\u2019s records to learn who was there. The Fourth Amendment was adopted to ensure that the government could never wield such power,\u201d the brief continued.<\/p>\n<p>Google, which provided the information the DOJ requested with the geofence warrant, filed a brief to the high court not taking a side in the case, but urging the Supreme Court \u201cto hold that Google Location History and other <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\" >similar digital documents stored remotely deserve<\/a> the Fourth Amendment\u2019s protection.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The technology company urged the high court to uphold that a person\u2019s location data should be subject to more individualized warrants, rather than blanket warrants that cover all data in the company\u2019s digital \u201ccloud.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cA contrary rule would leave the intimate details of millions of Americans\u2019 daily lives\u2014data that will exist in many forms as technology rapidly develops\u2014exposed to warrantless surveillance,\u201d the brief said.<\/p>\n<p>The case marks the latest foray by the Supreme Court into emerging law enforcement tools that take advantage of constantly evolving technology, such as device location data. The court previously ruled that law enforcement must show probable cause to obtain cell phone tower data as part of an investigation, in its 2018 <em>Carpenter v. United States<\/em> ruling.<\/p>\n<p><strong><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/4538712\/supreme-court-asks-criminal-legal-immigrants-be-denied-entry-in-us\/\" type=\"post\" id=\"4538712\">SUPREME COURT GRAPPLES WITH IF CRIMINAL LEGAL IMMIGRANTS MAY BE DENIED ENTRY IN THE US<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Oral arguments in <em>Chatrie v. United States<\/em> will begin at 10 a.m. Monday, kicking off the Supreme Court\u2019s final scheduled week of oral arguments for the term. After the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/four-major-cases-the-supreme-court-will-hear-in-2026\/\" title=\"Four major ...s the ... will hear in 2026\">high court hears arguments<\/a> in the case, a decision is expected by the end of June.<\/p>\n<p>During the final week of oral arguments, the Supreme Court is also set to hear arguments in a case over if Bayer, the maker of RoundUp weedkiller, should be held legally liable for not informing its customers that glyphosate could cause cancer on Monday immediately following arguments in <em>Chatrie<\/em>. On Wednesday, the high court will kick off its final argument day of the term by hearing a case on whether the Trump administration may end temporary protected status for Haiti and Syria.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court weighs constitutionality of geofence warrants in Chatrie v. US<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2638,"featured_media":2595538,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/AP26097645724219-1-1.jpg?w=696","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[33651,538],"tags":[51050,56337,32275],"class_list":["post-2595535","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-western-journal","category-washington-examiner","tag-law-enforcement-2","tag-legal-scrutiny","tag-supreme-court"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/AP26097645724219-1-1.jpg?w=696","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595535","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2638"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2595535"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595535\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2595540,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595535\/revisions\/2595540"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2595538"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2595535"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2595535"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2595535"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}