Sorry if there’s a paywall, will someone help me out, please? “Pierce described the investigation as using “one of the worst general warrants in American history.” He asked U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton “to open a more wide-ranging inquiry into the FBI’s use of these unconstitutional warrants.” “The warrants in this case plainly lacked probable cause with any particularity regarding the persons and things to be searched or even the crimes to be alleged,” Pierce wrote. Federal prosecutors said Cruz had no expectation of privacy inside the Capitol building or within the device-location data kept by Google and AT&T.“ Howeverrrrrrr...there’s this,”a divided United States Supreme Court in Carpenter v. United States, 2018 WL 3073916, *9 held Fourth Amendment protections extend to a cell phone user’s cell tower location data held by the user’s wireless company. Why? A cell phone user has a legitimate expectation of privacy concerning their physical movements according to the Court.” “When [the earlier cases] were decided in 1979, few could have imaged a society in which a phone goes wherever its owner goes, conveying to the wireless carrier not just dialed digits, but a detailed and comprehensive record of a person’s movements….We decline to extend [earlier precedent] to cover these novel circumstances. Given the unique nature of cell phone location records, the fact that the information is held by a third party does not by itself overcome the user’s claim to Fourth Amendment protection. Whether the Government employs its own surveillance technology … or leverages the technology of a wireless carrier, we hold that an individual maintains a legitimate expectation of privacy in the record of his physical movements as captured through CSLI. The location information obtained from Carpenter’s wireless carriers was the product of a search.“ https://www.rittgers.com/blog/2018/07/your-cell-phone-location-data-a-reasonable-expectation-of-privacy-the-united-states-supreme-court-we/ “