Extract from Isha Marathe’s article “Tech Providers, Not Courts, May Have the Last Word on Geofence Warrants”
This is the second part of a two-part series. The first part looked at how a circuit split over geofence warrants could potentially lead to challenges to reverse searches and keyword searches.
A recent circuit split over the constitutionality of geofence warrants has garnered some attention from attorneys and privacy professionals. But it also underscored an important fact: tech providers are miles ahead of the courts when it comes to regulating surveillance technology.
The split was between the United States v. Chatrie, from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and United States v. Smith in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit over whether geofence warrants—a type of reverse-search warrant that seeks to access a company’s location data to find a specific device over a specific period—are constitutional.
Some believe that these warrants violate individuals’ right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure, while others argue users are generally aware of what data they are choosing to make accessible by a search warrant.
