U.S. Supreme Court Issues Seminal Privacy Decision Concerning Cell Location Data

Robinson+Cole Data Privacy + Security Insider
Contact

Cell phones are a ubiquitous part of our modern life. It’s easy to forget that they are constantly tapping into the wireless networks around us several times a minute, even when we’re not using them. Each time a cell phone connects to a cell tower or cell site, it generates a time-stamped record known as “cell-site location information (CSLI).” Wireless carriers collect and store their customer’s increasingly precise CSLI generated from incoming calls, text messages, and routine data connections. Would you expect these CSLI records maintained by your service provider to remain private? What if the Police wanted access to them as part of their investigation of a crime? Should they be expected to obtain a warrant in order to obtain them?

The recent U.S. Supreme Court case of Carpenter v. United States dealt with that very issue. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court held that “an individual maintains a legitimate expectation of privacy in the record of his physical movements as captured through CSLI.” Accordingly, the Court ruled that the government generally needs a warrant to collect customer’s location dates from cellphone companies. In so doing, the Court recognized that “[i]n light of the deeply revealing nature of CSLI, its depth, breadth, and comprehensive reach, and the inescapable and automatic nature of its collection, the fact that such information is gathered by a third party does not make it any less deserving of Fourth Amendment protection.”

While this case was narrowly focused on historical CSLI data and the Fourth Amendment rights of a criminal defendant, and recognized that warrantless searches related to bomb threats, active shootings, and child abductions may still be approved, it still represents an important recognition by the Court of the interconnected, digital reality that we now live in. While the Court was careful to state that its decision is not intended to address anything other than the historical CSLI data at issue, other courts and litigants may seek to expand the Court’s reasoning and holding to other forms of cellphone and email data.

[View source.]

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Robinson+Cole Data Privacy + Security Insider | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Robinson+Cole Data Privacy + Security Insider
Contact
more
less

Robinson+Cole Data Privacy + Security Insider on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide