Supreme Court may allow geofence warrants, impacting privacy

When federal agents raided Washington Post reporter Hannah Nantanson’s home earlier this month, it reignited discussions about how reporters can protect confidential sources and sensitive information. “Having reported from dozens of countries with various levels of surveillance, I’ve found that the safest method for interacting with sources who would face the most jeopardy if exposed is to meet in person and cover your tracks,” said Steve Herman, executive director of the Jordan Center for Journalism Advocacy and Innovation, in a recent statement by the National Press Club Journalism Institute. That’s good advice. But “covering your tracks” when meeting sources isn’t always easy. And a new Supreme Court case, Chatrie v. United States, could make it harder. The dangers of geofence warrants At the heart of the Chatrie case are legal orders known as geofence warrants. This controversial tool allows police to demand location data from tech companies (usually Google) to see every device in