Supreme Court Debates Geofence Warrants

0:00It's April 28th, I'm Cory with the story. This is Anchorage News Today, driven by AI. The Supreme Court just heard arguments on geofence warrants. These tools letting cops grab cell phone location data from tech companies like Google for, phones near a crime scene. The case comes from a 2019 Credit Union robbery in Virginia, where they use one to ID suspect Okelo Chatri from surveillance footage, showing a phone in action. In their robbery, police got a warrant for Google data on devices within about 500 feet of the spot for one hour. Google first sent anonymous info on potential hits, then narrowed it to nine users, and finally de-anautomized three without another warrant. Now the court's wrestling with Fourth Amendment rules on privacy versus crime solving. Justices grilled both sides, with some like Amy Coney Barrett calling out extremes from cops and defense alike. A big coalition of 31 states plus DC backs these warrants, saying that precise when tailored right and key for unknown suspects, civil liberties folks and even Google warn they drag in

1:05innocence, like folks at clinics or rallies. This builds on the court's 2018 ruling needing warrants for basic cell tower pings, but here the government's saying users consent by, sharing with Google, so no privacy expectation. Critics counter that opens doors to grabbing photos or calendars too. Whatever they decide, it'll set how cops tap digital trails without overreach, balancing safety and rights in our always track world.