All rise for the Chatrie.

This episode of Caveat dives into the Supreme Court's oral arguments in *Chattree v. United States*, a landmark case examining the constitutionality of geofence warrants used by law enforcement to identify suspects through location data from tech giants like Google. The case centers on a bank robbery where investigators used geofence data to narrow down suspects, ultimately leading to Chattree’s arrest. The core legal debate revolves around whether such data collection constitutes a Fourth Amendment search, the applicability of the particularity requirement, and whether the case is even justiciable given that Chattree’s conviction is likely to stand regardless of the outcome. The hosts unpack multiple layers: the tension between privacy and law enforcement efficacy, the evolving role of tech companies in surveillance, and the potential for a fragmented decision with multiple concurrences and dissents. They highlight the broader implications for digital privacy, especially as AI and data aggregation grow more powerful, and express concern that the Court may avoid a definitive ruling by citing mootness or narrow grounds, leaving critical legal questions unresolved for years to come.