In a recent letter to members of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee, dated February 18, 2021, the United States Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (the “Inspector General”) outlined a potential disagreement with the Criminal Investigations Division of the Internal Revenue Service (“Criminal Investigations”) regarding the need for a search warrant to utilize databases containing cell phone users’ GPS data. On one hand, the Inspector General indicated that courts may use “similar logic” to expand a 2018 Supreme Court decision requiring a search warrant to access cell-site location information to likewise apply to GPS data provided to applications operated by third parties. On the other hand, the letter provides the stated position of Criminal Investigations, which asserts that “Cell Site Location Information [] is distinct from [] opt-in app data,” in apparent reference to the division’s prior claim that GPS data collected by cell phone applications does not require a search warrant because it has been “voluntarily” provided to a third-party.
Other AALRR Blogs
Recent Posts
- A Plaintiff, a Defendant, and a Judge Walk Into an AI Trap
- Watch Out For Insurance Policy Sublimits That Can Result In Less Coverage For Claims
- A Prevailing Plaintiff On A Financial Elder Abuse Claim Is Entitled To An Award Of All Fees Intertwined With The Prosecution Of Such A Claim Which Includes The Successful Defense Of A Competing Claim For Elder Abuse
- A Derivative Plaintiff Who Defeats an Initial Bond Motion Must Still Pay the Ordinary Costs that Go to the Victor if They Lose at Trial
- Density Bonus Agreement Survives Foreclosure: California Court Rules Affordable Housing Covenant Equivalent to Permit Condition
- Can You Contract Away Your Right to a California Jury Trial? The California Supreme Court Clarifies the Limits of Forum Selection Clauses in Contracts Formed in California
- Federal Judges Find Use of Copyrighted Books to Train AI is Fair Use But Differ in How They Get There
- Trademarks in the Age of AI: The Emerging Legal Battlefield for Brand Owners and Users of Generative AI
- Considerations in Enforcing a Broad Release and Waiver of Liability Form
- Recent California Supreme Court Decision Encourages Parties to Make Reasonable Settlement Offers (aka a 998 Offer) as Early as Possible
Popular Categories
- (32)
- (31)
- (7)
- (7)
- (1)
- (5)
- (15)
- (3)
- (4)
- (2)
- (1)
- (3)
- (1)
- (3)
- (2)
- (1)
- (4)
- (5)
- (2)
- (2)
- (1)
- (2)
- (3)
- (1)
- (2)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
Contributors
- Cindy Strom Arellano
- Gary A. Barrera
- Eduardo A. Carvajal
- Michele L. Collender
- Scott K. Dauscher
- Christopher M. Francis
- Evan J. Gautier
- Carol A. Gefis
- Edward C. Ho
- Micah R. Jacobs
- John E. James
- Jonathan Judge
- David Kang
- Jeannie Y. Kang
- Michael H. Kang
- Matthew D. Kramer
- Joseph K. Lee
- Thomas A. Lenz
- Shawn M. Ogle
- Kenneth L. Perkins, Jr.
- Jon M. Setoguchi
- Ryan C. Squire
- McKenna Stephens
- Jon Ustundag
- Brian M. Wheeler