Supreme Court Rules Constitution Protects Location Data

• The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Chatrie v. United States that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their location data, subjecting even short-term surveillance to Fourth Amendment protections.
• The decision establishes that digital records generated by apps are considered personal property, requiring constitutional protection regardless of whether they are shared with third-party tech companies.
• Geofence warrants, which compel companies to provide data on every device within a specific area, are deemed highly problematic as they treat innocent bystanders as suspects without individualized probable cause.

Background and Context

• Chatrie v. United States addresses 2019 geofence warrants that compelled Google to disclose location data for all users within a radius encompassing homes, businesses, and a church in Northern Virginia.
• This ruling builds upon the 2018 Carpenter v. United States precedent, extending privacy protections to shorter-term movements that can still reveal intimate personal, political, and professional associations.
• While the Supreme Court affirmed these constitutional protections, the specific case has been remanded to the Fourth Circuit to determine if the specific warrant was "reasonable" and whether the "good faith" doctrine applies to the evidence obtained.

Broader Implications

• The Court emphasized that app data is protected because users consider it their own and expect it to remain shielded from government intrusion.
• Justice Gorsuch, in a concurring opinion, characterized location data as personal property protected under the Fourth Amendment's "effects" clause.
• Although Google ceased responding to mass geofence requests in July 2025, other surveillance avenues remain, such as "cell tower dump" warrants and data brokers who aggregate information from various applications.