Carpenter only covers cell data and was specifically meant to apply narrowly to that type of info.

Glad you mentioned Carpenter. I've been spending a Lot of time getting to know it and related cases lately (Chatrie)

Roberts did use the word 'narrow' in the Carpenter opinion. That part is accurate. But read what narrow actually meant: the Court said it wasn't overturning all of third-party doctrine at once, and wasn't addressing every possible surveillance technology.

It was not saying 'this principle only applies to cell phones forever.' The actual holding was that a warrant is required whenever someone has a legitimate privacy interest in records held by a third party.

That's not phone-specific. Roberts even wrote that the ruling must account for 'more sophisticated systems already in use.' He was explicitly anticipating future applications.

Chatrie v. United States, decided June 29th this year, just 2 months ago, is exactly that next application:

Chatrie v. United States, decided June 29, 2026, 6-3: SCOTUS held that when police use a "geofence warrant" demanding that Google hand over location data from all devices near a crime scene during a specific time window constitutes a Fourth Amendment search requiring a warrant backed by probable cause.

	▲	alex43578 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, and all this ties nicely to Flock: Google/Flock can collect the data - constitutional. Google/Flock can sell the data - constitutional. There’s the potential for searching the database to require a warrant, but the cameras themselves, and being recorded on a public street (which everyone’s crying about) has no reasonable pathway to being unconstitutional.

▲

DarmokTanagra 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Good thing that there isn't a court in the United States that exists solely to make those kinds of distinctions and revise previous interpretations of the law in order to apply them to an evolving legal landscape.

Flock cameras using facial recognition to surveil citizens in public spaces without a warrant is a 4th amendment violation under any rational reading, and it is up to the American people whether they want to live in country that no longer holds itself accountable to the law or not.

It really has no impact on my life beyond the looming existential crisis of the world's largest military and nuclear power slowly becoming a rogue fascist state.

▲

alex43578 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Good thing the courts are already upholding the constitutionality of Flock in US v Jackson and Schmidt v. City of Norfolk. If it reaches the SC, I think it'd be easy to see a limit similar to Carpenter on scope and duration of the searches of the database without a warrant, but recognize fundamentally that collecting the data itself is not violating anyone's rights.

As just mentioned, being watched in a public space doesn't constitute a violation of the 4th Amendment. Under any rational reading, you are not being searched.

It really has no impact on anyone's life, especially if they participate in any part of society. Your phone records, credit cards, and every social media and email account are all far more invasive tracking and without even the veneer of accountability. Even for criminals, it hardly makes a difference if they pull an ID from Flock, your cell records, or the bodega security camera and Ring doorbell footage people would happily offer to a cop. Investigating a crime by looking at a security camera is not fascism, just like deporting an illegal immigrant or dispersing a riot isn't fascism.

▲

diydsp 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Existing wrongs are not corrected by adding a wrong.

New wrongs aren't justified by existing wrongs.

▲

DarmokTanagra 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

otterley 15 hours ago | parent [-]

Hey, knock it off. People are going to disagree and we need to respect each other in so doing.

Since you’re apparently new here, please familiarize yourself with the HN Guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

“Edit out swipes.”

▲

DarmokTanagra 14 hours ago | parent [-]

Spare me the dang cosplay.

You can choose to rationalize the actions of fascists all you want, but the rest of the world is not obligated to respect you for it.

In my country we have a word that roughly translates to “lackey to those in power”, but I think I prefer the American English pejorative “bootlicker”.

	▲	otterley 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It doesn't matter. Don't sneer or insult people here. If you want to do that, there are other venues you can choose.