In a case that could redefine the boundaries of digital privacy, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to determine whether the government can legally use “geofence” warrants to sweep up the location data of thousands of people at once.
The case, Chatrie v. United States, has become a flashpoint for civil liberties groups who argue that law enforcement is increasingly using technology to bypass the Fourth Amendment.
At the heart of the dispute is the Liberty Justice Center (LJC), which filed a formal amicus curiae brief on March 2, 2026, urging the Court to strike down the use of these warrants. Geofence warrants allow police to demand that companies like Google or cellular providers hand over data for every mobile device that was present within a specific area during a specific timeframe.
The LJC argues these warrants are the modern-day version of “general warrants”—indiscriminate search orders used by British authorities in the 18th century to rummage through the homes of colonists.
READ: GOP Rep. Malliotakis Triumphs As Supreme Court Halts New York Redistricting
Those historical abuses were the primary reason the Founding Fathers drafted the Fourth Amendment, which requires that warrants be specific and based on probable cause.
A Chain of Hunches
The legal challenge centers on the reliability and “particularity” of the technology. According to court filings, geofence warrants often rely on a “chain of hunches.” Investigators must guess that a suspect had a smartphone, that the phone was tracking location, that a specific company has that data, and that the data is accurate.
However, the LJC points out that this data is frequently flawed. Research cited in the brief suggests that some location data only has a 68% accuracy rate. This can lead to “false positives,” where innocent people are placed at a crime scene simply because their GPS signal drifted or they happened to be nearby.
“The government is not entitled to track all of us for our own good,” said Reilly Stephens, Director of Amicus Practice at the Liberty Justice Center. “Dragnet geofence warrants toss anyone with a phone in their pocket in the same bucket, subjecting the population to systematic invasions of privacy for government convenience.”
Real-World Consequences
The brief highlights that these digital dragnets have already caused real-world harm. In previous cases, individuals have been arrested for murder or burglary simply because their phone data put them near a crime scene—in one instance, a man was targeted because he happened to be riding his bike past a house that was being robbed.
The LJC argues that if the Supreme Court upholds these warrants, there will be no limit to government surveillance. Police could potentially use geofences to identify everyone at a political protest, a religious gathering, or a doctor’s office, transforming every bystander into a potential target.
Diminishing Returns for Police
The legal pushback comes at a time when tech companies are making it harder for police to access this information.
Google, for instance, recently moved to store Maps location data directly on users’ devices rather than in the cloud. This change means that in many cases, the company no longer has the data to give to police, even if served with a warrant.
The Liberty Justice Center, known for fighting government overreach in cases involving automated license plate readers and warrantless searches of private property, argues that the Constitution must keep pace with technology.
They are asking the Court to clarify that “mere propinquity”—or simply being near a crime—is not enough to justify a search of a person’s digital life.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
