home.social

#fourth-amendment — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #fourth-amendment, aggregated by home.social.

fetched live
  1. The US Supreme Court ruled the Fourth Amendment protects cellphone location history, requiring warrants for government access to geolocation data. ⚖️📍
    The 6-3 decision limits geofence warrant use but stops short of declaring the warrants themselves unconstitutional. 🔒

    🔗 arstechnica.com/tech-policy/20

    #TechNews #SupremeCourt #Privacy #GeofenceWarrants #FourthAmendment #Location #DigitalRights #CyberSecurity #Technology #Surveillance #DataPrivacy #InfoSec #Law #Tech #US #USA #Trump #Government #Politics

  2. The US Supreme Court ruled the Fourth Amendment protects cellphone location history, requiring warrants for government access to geolocation data. ⚖️📍
    The 6-3 decision limits geofence warrant use but stops short of declaring the warrants themselves unconstitutional. 🔒

    🔗 arstechnica.com/tech-policy/20

    #TechNews #SupremeCourt #Privacy #GeofenceWarrants #FourthAmendment #Location #DigitalRights #CyberSecurity #Technology #Surveillance #DataPrivacy #InfoSec #Law #Tech #US #USA #Trump #Government #Politics

  3. US Supreme Court ruled police generally need a valid warrant backed by probable cause before using geofence searches for cellphone location data. ⚖️
    The 6-3 Chatrie ruling recognizes location records as private, limiting broad geofence warrants and strengthening digital privacy protections. 🔒

    🔗 cnet.com/news/privacy/supreme-

    #TechNews #Privacy #SupremeCourt #Geofence #LocationData #FourthAmendment #DigitalRights #Cybersecurity #Technology #DataProtection #OpenSource #FOSS #InfoSec #US #USA

  4. US Supreme Court ruled police generally need a valid warrant backed by probable cause before using geofence searches for cellphone location data. ⚖️
    The 6-3 Chatrie ruling recognizes location records as private, limiting broad geofence warrants and strengthening digital privacy protections. 🔒

    🔗 cnet.com/news/privacy/supreme-

    #TechNews #Privacy #SupremeCourt #Geofence #LocationData #FourthAmendment #DigitalRights #Cybersecurity #Technology #DataProtection #OpenSource #FOSS #InfoSec #US #USA

  5. "The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that people have an expectation of privacy from the government as their mobile devices track them throughout their daily activities, even when that information is shared with companies like Google and Apple.

    The 6-3 decision in Chatrie v. United States extends Fourth Amendment protections to data that people hand over to tech companies, meaning police need a warrant to obtain it. Justices Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett and Clarence Thomas dissented.

    The Trump administration argued that users did not have an expectation of privacy after voluntarily sharing their location data with companies like Google.

    “An individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his cell phone’s location, and police intrude on that constitutionally protected interest when they demand the information — even though for only a limited time, and from a third-party tech company,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority.

    The case involves a 2019 bank robbery in Virginia, where police arrested Okello Chatrie after using a geofence warrant to locate all devices near the scene of the crime."

    politico.com/news/2026/06/29/s

    #USA #Privacy #FourthAmendment #Geolocation #Surveillance

  6. "The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that people have an expectation of privacy from the government as their mobile devices track them throughout their daily activities, even when that information is shared with companies like Google and Apple.

    The 6-3 decision in Chatrie v. United States extends Fourth Amendment protections to data that people hand over to tech companies, meaning police need a warrant to obtain it. Justices Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett and Clarence Thomas dissented.

    The Trump administration argued that users did not have an expectation of privacy after voluntarily sharing their location data with companies like Google.

    “An individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his cell phone’s location, and police intrude on that constitutionally protected interest when they demand the information — even though for only a limited time, and from a third-party tech company,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority.

    The case involves a 2019 bank robbery in Virginia, where police arrested Okello Chatrie after using a geofence warrant to locate all devices near the scene of the crime."

    politico.com/news/2026/06/29/s

    #USA #Privacy #FourthAmendment #Geolocation #Surveillance

  7. This is a privacy victory. It deserves to be celebrated. The Supreme Court ruled that geofence warrants violate the Fourth Amendment, 6–3.

    scotusblog.com/2026/06/court-r

    However, there’s a hidden detail that is worth flagging. And it’s not good.

    This ruling arose from Chatrie v United States. Google gave generic cell phone records to the cops. No specificity means unconstitutional. Maybe.

    The federal judge on the case agreed that it was unconstitutional. But she allowed evidence from the violation to be used anyway. Why? She cited that “even if there had been a violation of the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement officials had acted in good faith.”

    In. Good. Faith.

    This translates to “cops can violate the constitution if we believe their intentions are good.”

    How many cops do you know who act in good faith?

    #FourthAmendment #4thAmendment #Privacy #BigTech #SCOTUS #ChatrieVUnitedStates #Constitution #AbolishThePolice

  8. This is a privacy victory. It deserves to be celebrated. The Supreme Court ruled that geofence warrants violate the Fourth Amendment, 6–3.

    scotusblog.com/2026/06/court-r

    However, there’s a hidden detail that is worth flagging. And it’s not good.

    This ruling arose from Chatrie v United States. Google gave generic cell phone records to the cops. No specificity means unconstitutional. Maybe.

    The federal judge on the case agreed that it was unconstitutional. But she allowed evidence from the violation to be used anyway. Why? She cited that “even if there had been a violation of the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement officials had acted in good faith.”

    In. Good. Faith.

    This translates to “cops can violate the constitution if we believe their intentions are good.”

    How many cops do you know who act in good faith?

    #FourthAmendment #4thAmendment #Privacy #BigTech #SCOTUS #ChatrieVUnitedStates #Constitution #AbolishThePolice

  9. [en] Effects of #Technology on #Privacy Interests

    "That [US #Fourth] #Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches or seizures of persons, houses, papers, and effects. Yet it is undeniable that #technological advances enable the police to pry into formerly #private areas in ways unimaginable to the drafters of the Bill of Rights."

    "... [US] Supreme Court has updated the Fourth Amendment to #limit #unrestrained #police searches that draw on new technologies."

    "... the Fourth Amendment requires a reasonable search, and generally requires a #warrant, when the government seeks to #compel the production of information from a service provider about an individual’s #location generated by his #phone." ...

    justsecurity.org/145214/chatri

    #chatrie #fourthamendment #search #seizures #probablecause

  10. [en] Effects of #Technology on #Privacy Interests

    "That [US #Fourth] #Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches or seizures of persons, houses, papers, and effects. Yet it is undeniable that #technological advances enable the police to pry into formerly #private areas in ways unimaginable to the drafters of the Bill of Rights."

    "... [US] Supreme Court has updated the Fourth Amendment to #limit #unrestrained #police searches that draw on new technologies."

    "... the Fourth Amendment requires a reasonable search, and generally requires a #warrant, when the government seeks to #compel the production of information from a service provider about an individual’s #location generated by his #phone." ...

    justsecurity.org/145214/chatri

    #chatrie #fourthamendment #search #seizures #probablecause

  11. ⚖️ The Supreme Court just ended its term with some of the most consequential rulings in a generation — overturning a 91-year-old precedent on presidential power, protecting the Federal Reserve, upholding mail ballot grace periods, letting the E. Jean Carroll judgment stand, and expanding Fourth Amendment digital privacy rights. All in one day.

    What it means for every American — and what comes next — at The Democracy Advocate.

    🔗 https://thedemocracyadvocate.com/news-to-know/supreme-court/supreme-court-reshapes-executive-power/

    #SupremeCourt #SCOTUS #ExecutivePower #ElectionLaw #FourthAmendment #FederalReserve #HumphreysExecutor #Democracy #Accountability #USPolitics
  12. #SupremeCourt ruling guts government’s use of #geofence #warrants

    The #FourthAmendment protects a user’s “location history,” the Supreme Court ruled Monday.

    The same logic already applied to a cellphone’s #tracking , and the high court found “no good reason exists to reach a different result for Location History” collected by third parties like #Google.

    Split 6-3, the majority agreed that the government needs a #warrant and must show reasonable cause to turn a phone's location-tracking services into a government #surveillance tool.
    #privacy

    arstechnica.com/tech-policy/20

  13. #SupremeCourt ruling guts government’s use of #geofence #warrants

    The #FourthAmendment protects a user’s “location history,” the Supreme Court ruled Monday.

    The same logic already applied to a cellphone’s #tracking , and the high court found “no good reason exists to reach a different result for Location History” collected by third parties like #Google.

    Split 6-3, the majority agreed that the government needs a #warrant and must show reasonable cause to turn a phone's location-tracking services into a government #surveillance tool.
    #privacy

    arstechnica.com/tech-policy/20

  14. Building a detailed target profile from public behavioral data used to require analyst time and domain expertise. Both constraints are
    being removed by the same capability change that mapped an ICS environment from scratch in one session this week.

    Commercial surveillance infrastructure was already built for scale. #AI just makes operating it against individuals faster and cheaper.

    #privacy #infosec #FourthAmendment #infrastructure

  15. Building a detailed target profile from public behavioral data used to require analyst time and domain expertise. Both constraints are
    being removed by the same capability change that mapped an ICS environment from scratch in one session this week.

    Commercial surveillance infrastructure was already built for scale. #AI just makes operating it against individuals faster and cheaper.

    #privacy #infosec #FourthAmendment #infrastructure

  16. NY Assembly Bill A2228 would require criminal background checks
    to buy a 3D printer "capable of creating firearms."
    The bill text is broad. "Capable of" is not defined.
    Most consumer FDM printers can print gun components.
    So can a milling machine. So can a lathe.
    This is infrastructure for printer registration.
    The firearm framing is the foot in the door.
    Still in committee. Worth watching.
    nysenate.gov/legislation/bills

    #privacy #FourthAmendment #NewYork #surveillance #legislature

  17. Reuters: The Epstein Files and the risks of forensic image retention. “The Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to experience blowback from how it handled the release of voluminous files from the criminal investigations of Jeffrey Epstein. Overlooked in this debate is the Fourth Amendment question raised by the disclosures themselves: what the Constitution requires when the government makes […]

    https://rbfirehose.com/2026/05/17/reuters-the-epstein-files-and-the-risks-of-forensic-image-retention/
  18. Reuters: The Epstein Files and the risks of forensic image retention. “The Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to experience blowback from how it handled the release of voluminous files from the criminal investigations of Jeffrey Epstein. Overlooked in this debate is the Fourth Amendment question raised by the disclosures themselves: what the Constitution requires when the government makes […]

    https://rbfirehose.com/2026/05/17/reuters-the-epstein-files-and-the-risks-of-forensic-image-retention/