15d ago <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41228630">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41228630</a><p>It is still welcome (if surprising) news from the 5th circuit, especially following July's contradictory ruling from the 4th circuit.<p><a href="https://reason.com/volokh/2024/07/10/accessing-google-location-history-records-is-not-a-search-at-least-when-limited-fourth-circuit-rules/" rel="nofollow">https://reason.com/volokh/2024/07/10/accessing-google-locati...</a>
Orin Kerr's analysis of this new ruling, which is linked from the Tech Crunch article, helps break down where the specific splits with other courts lie. This is useful even if you don't agree with Kerr's analysis of the validity of any specific courts' decisions: <a href="https://reason.com/volokh/2024/08/13/fifth-circuit-shuts-down-geofence-warrants-and-maybe-a-lot-more/" rel="nofollow">https://reason.com/volokh/2024/08/13/fifth-circuit-shuts-dow...</a>
It’s interesting to note this decision in favor of privacy came from the 5th Circuit court, a predominantly conservative court. As the article notes, the 4th Circuit, made up largely of Democratic appointees, ruled in favor of the search warrants.