Opinion ID: 2742963
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Supreme Court Precedent

Text: The United States Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether probable cause and a warrant are required, either under the statutory scheme or based on the Fourth Amendment, for an order requiring disclosure of real time cell site location - 13 - information to be used by law enforcement to track a subscriber’s cell phone. In 1967, long before the possibility of cell phone tracking emerged, the Supreme Court decided Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), in which the Court laid the groundwork for the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test which became a staple of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. The Court in Katz held that “the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places,” and concluded that attachment of an eavesdropping device to a public telephone booth violated the Fourth Amendment. Id. at 351, 361 (Harlan, J., concurring). Later Supreme Court cases