Supreme Court rules geofence warrants require probable cause in major privacy win

On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that geofence warrants are a search under the Fourth Amendment. Law enforcement must now obtain a traditional warrant based on probable cause before demanding cellphone location data from companies like Google.

The decision came in United States v. Chatrie, a case stemming from a 2018 bank robbery in Glen Allen, Virginia, where $195,000 was stolen. Police served Google with a geofence warrant covering an area around the bank for an hour before and after the crime, identifying 19 devices. Google initially provided data for three accounts, one of which belonged to suspect Okello Chatrie, who later confessed.

Higher bar for location data requests

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, stated that "an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his cell-phone location information." The ruling rejects the government's argument that users voluntarily forfeit privacy by keeping location services active. The Court did not declare geofence warrants unconstitutional outright but set a precedent that such dragnet searches require probable cause specific to a suspect.

• Geofence warrants are now considered a government search triggering Fourth Amendment protections.
• Police cannot rely on a warrant that demands location data for all devices near a crime scene without individualized suspicion.
• The decision does not automatically overturn past convictions obtained through geofence warrants, leaving those cases to lower courts.
• Dissenting justices warned of "seismic" consequences for law enforcement investigations.

A shift for digital privacy

This ruling builds on the 2018 Carpenter decision, which protected historical cell-site location records. Privacy advocates called it a major win, arguing geofence warrants allowed police to search millions of innocent people. Tech companies, which had pushed back against such warrants, may see fewer demands. However, the ruling leaves open questions about real-time location tracking and other emerging surveillance methods. Chatrie's conviction is expected to stand despite the ruling.

Law enforcement agencies will need to adopt new procedures for location data requests. The decision may also spur Congress to craft legislation governing digital location privacy. For now, the Supreme Court has drawn a clear line: your phone's location history is not free for the government to mine without a proper warrant.