Geofence Warrant Court Decision ‘Step in the Right Direction’: EFF
The California Superior Court in San Francisco found in a Sept. 30 decision in People v. Dawes that a geofence warrant issued to San Francisco police violated the Fourth Amendment and California’s “landmark electronic communications privacy law,” blogged Jennifer Lynch,…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Electronic Frontier Foundation director-surveillance litigation. Geofence warrants aid law enforcement in identifying an unknown suspect by obtaining geolocation data of all electronic devices at the location, on the date and at the time of the criminal activity. A geofence warrant captures all the users located within that area during the time period specified. The court “suppressed evidence stemming from the warrant, becoming the first court in California to do so,” said Lynch Tuesday. “EFF filed an amicus brief early on in the case, arguing geofence warrants are unconstitutional.” Though EFF was disappointed that the ruling was “narrow,” the decision “does place important limits on future police use of these warrants,” she said. “Not only will San Francisco police now be required to ensure the scope of their warrants is extremely narrow, officers must go back to the court for a new warrant at each step of the geofence process. This is at least a step in the right direction.”