Jocelyn Aqua, Jennifer Bagg, John Nakahata, & Alex Tate recently co-authored a client alert examining the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Chatrie v. United States, which held that law enforcement’s use of Google Location History through the geofence warrant process constitutes a Fourth Amendment search.
The authors discuss the Court’s recognition of precise historical location data as highly sensitive information, its rejection of arguments that short-duration requests or third-party storage diminish constitutional protections, and its decision to leave important questions regarding the validity of geofence warrants and other reverse-location investigative techniques unresolved. They also explore the broader implications for companies that collect, store, or process location and location-equivalent data, including heightened scrutiny of law enforcement requests and evolving privacy expectations.
Together, these developments reshape the legal landscape for digital location data and underscore the importance of businesses reviewing their data retention, disclosure, and law-enforcement response practices as courts continue to define the scope of constitutional protections for sensitive location information.
Read full article here.