In its first digital-privacy case since 2018, the court builds on a privacy precedent it set then.

We have seen this movie before, and the original version ended with a whimper, not a bang.

Your cellphone continuously creates a durable and revealing digital trail that law enforcement can obtain with a warrant.

Kagan insists that the Fourth Amendment cannot be defeated by slicing invasions of privacy into pieces small enough to appear ...

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Chatrie v. United States extends Fourth Amendment protection to geofence location data ...

Updated on June 29 at 3:50 p.m. The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that when law enforcement officials used a “geofence ...

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a far-reaching decision on the constitutionality of a law enforcement tool that allows police to access the location histories of millions of cell phone users. In a ...

They talk about how Kerr became interested in these issues, the history and physicality assumptions of the Fourth Amendment, and how and why the digital world is different. They also discuss how the ...

Geofence warrants compel tech companies like Google to provide information about electronic devices that are present in a ...

Nearly 60 years after Katz v. United States, the Supreme Court is still debating what counts as a reasonable expectation of ...

This article explains how new surveillance and biometric tech, like drones and facial recognition, challenge privacy rights. Courts are increasingly scrutinizing when warrants are needed, balancing ...

On April 27th, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Chatrie v. United States, on the Fourth Amendment implications of geofencing. I have already posted the amicus brief I wrote for the Court ...