United States v. Jones: Government's Placing of GPS Tracking Device on Car is a Fourth Amendment Search
January 23, 2012
The United States Supreme Court today held that the government’s placement of a GPS tracking device on a car while it was parked in a public parking lot was a search for Fourth Amendment purposes. The decision, written by Justice Scalia, makes clear that the Fourth Amendment’s protection against government trespass survives the “reasonable expectation of privacy” analysis of Katz v. United States, 389 U. S. 347, 351 (1967). Earlier cases by the Seventh Circuit, United States v. Garcia, 474 F.3d 994 (7th Cir. 2007), and the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in Wisconsin v. Sveum, 2009 WI App 81, aff’d on other grounds, 2010 WI 92, had held that GPS placements were not Fourth Amendment searches.
Disclaimer
This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.
Related Insights
April 28, 2026
Health Care Law Today
Medicare Payment Suspensions Emerge as a Key Tool in Federal Anti-Fraud Efforts — Focus on California Hospices
Medicare payment suspensions result in a cessation of payments for Medicare services until the suspension is resolved, typically several months after the initial action to suspend. Payments withheld will then be released after recoupment of any determined overpayments. The Trump Administration has stated that it will aggressively use its authority (created by the 2010 Affordable Care Act) to suspend payments based upon a credible allegation of fraud. Below we set forth the context for such suspensions, as well as the key parameters for such actions.
April 28, 2026
Health Care Law Today
Psychedelics and the Executive Order: From Schedule I to Treatment Priority
On April 18, 2026, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled Accelerating Medical Treatments for Serious Mental Illness, directing federal agencies to expedite the research, review, and approval of psychedelic drugs as potential treatments for serious mental health conditions. The Order represents a significant federal policy shift aimed at addressing what the Trump Administration describes as a crisis of serious mental illness in America, with particular emphasis on patients whose conditions have not responded to standard therapies.
April 27, 2026
Health Care Law Today
Maine Health Care Transactions: New State Approvals Involving Some Private Equity, Hedge Funds, and MSOs
On April 13, 2026, Governor Janet Mills signed H.P. 1480 / L.D. 2201 (the Act), giving the Maine Department of Health and Human Services (the Department) approval authority over certain health care transactions involving private equity companies, hedge funds, and certain management services organizations (MSOs) connected to private equity or hedge fund ownership.