Skip to main content
Day.News — Local News. Real Community.
COLUMBUS DAY NEWS
Local News. Real Community.
politics
2 min read

Supreme Court to Hear Case on Geofence Data Privacy

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Monday in *Chatrie v. United States*, a case examining police access to geofence data. The case addresses Fourth Amendment protections related to digital location information.

06/12/2026 · Washington edition

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in *Chatrie v. United States* on Monday, a case concerning law enforcement access to geofence data. Geofence data includes location information collected by cellphone applications.

The case raises questions about Fourth Amendment protections in the digital age, specifically whether police must obtain a warrant to access this type of data.

In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled in *Carpenter v. United States* that police need a warrant to access seven or more days of cell-site location information (CSLI). CSLI is generated when cell phones connect to cell towers. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that accessing that amount of location data without a warrant violates a person’s “reasonable expectation of privacy.”

The *Chatrie* case differs from *Carpenter* because it involves data generated by cellphone apps. This data combines information from cell towers with GPS, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth signals. Law enforcement sought this data from Google to identify potential suspects in a bank robbery, requesting an anonymized list of devices present near the bank during the time of the crime.

Police initially obtained a warrant for an anonymized list of phones in a 17.5-acre area around the bank. They subsequently requested location information for a subset of those phones in a two-hour window and then asked Google to identify three devices whose movements matched details of the investigation. One of those devices was linked to Okello Chatrie.

Chatrie argues that accessing geofence data violates the Fourth Amendment. He maintains that he did not voluntarily share his location data with Google, despite agreeing to the app's terms of service. He describes this as "consent by adhesion" because of the power imbalance between him and the company.

Chatrie also argues that the warrant issued to Google amounted to an unconstitutional general warrant because it lacked a specific target and compelled Google to search through all user records.

Google announced in 2023 that it would no longer store Location History data on its servers. The company’s policy change means Google no longer possesses the data needed to respond to police geofence requests. Regardless, the Supreme Court's decision in *Chatrie v. United States* could shape the future of digital privacy and influence how the Fourth Amendment applies to new technologies.

Related Topics

Editorial Transparency
AI-Generated · Written by National Desk

Article Ratings

Factual
0.0
Likeable
0.0
Bias
0.0
Objective
0.0

How do you feel about this story?

NA

National Desk

Trust 3.1102445 articles8,231,170 views75% fact accuracy
View Profile

Sign in to follow this author from their profile.

Discussion (0)

Join the Conversation

Join the conversation

Sign in to share your thoughts, reply to readers, and like comments.

Sign in to comment
Sort by:
0 comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

Trending Now

Trending stories will appear here.

More from Washington

No other local stories are available right now.

Events & Things to Do

Read section →

Upcoming events will appear here.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Keep Reading

Related Stories

More politics stories from Washington

politics

Supreme Court Considers State Lawsuits Against Energy Companies Over Climate Change Costs

The Supreme Court opened its term by hearing arguments in a lawsuit from Boulder, Colorado, seeking to hold energy companies responsible for climate change impacts. The case challenges whether state law claims of this nature are preempted by federal law. The outcome remains unclear after the initial hearing.

Read Story →
politics

White House Excludes Politico Reporter from Presidential Travel Pool

The White House excluded a Politico reporter from the press pool covering a presidential trip to Nebraska. This action follows a similar exclusion of CNN last week. CNN, MS NOW, and Politico subsequently filed a lawsuit after being denied access to White House grounds.

Read Story →
politics

Democrats Eye Senate Control for Supreme Court Vacancy Influence

Democrats calculate they need four additional Senate seats to control judicial appointments. This possibility arises as Justice Samuel Alito has reportedly considered retirement. Such a scenario would significantly alter the dynamics of Supreme Court vacancies.

Read Story →
politics

Supreme Court Considers Climate Liability Cases

The Supreme Court began its new term by examining cases that aim to assign liability to energy companies for damages attributed to climate change. These proceedings mark an early focus on environmental litigation for the high court.

Read Story →
politics

Analysts Discuss Trump's Campaign Pledges and GOP Spending Strategies

Political analysts Tamara Keith and Amy Walter discussed recent political developments, including former President Donald Trump's campaign pledges for midterm elections. They also reviewed Republican spending on campaign defenses in traditionally conservative districts and a White House decision regarding press access.

Read Story →
politics

Obama Joins El-Sayed Campaign in Detroit Ahead of Midterms

Former President Barack Obama plans to campaign with Michigan gubernatorial candidate Abdul El-Sayed in Detroit. This appearance marks an increased effort by Obama to support Democratic candidates ahead of the midterm elections. He recently recorded advertisements for numerous gubernatorial and Senate campaigns.

Read Story →
Scroll for more stories