John Roberts rejects warrantless access to historical cell-site records
John RobertsChief justice, writing the Supreme Court majority opinion
Roberts rejects treating the carrier's possession of location records as sufficient to eliminate the customer's Fourth Amendment protection.
Responding to
Obtaining carriers' historical cell-site business records does not search the customer for Fourth Amendment purposes.
“Given the unique nature of cell phone location records, the fact that the information is held by a third party does not by itself overcome the user’s claim to Fourth Amendment protection.”
Original text
Where this statement fits
Carpenter: Roberts and Kennedy split over police access to cellphone location records
In June 2018, the Supreme Court ruled five to four that obtaining Timothy Carpenter's historical cellphone location records was a search and generally required a warrant. Chief Justice John Roberts stressed the reach of location surveillance. Justice Anthony Kennedy dissented, arguing that the government obtained the carriers' business records rather than searching Carpenter's property.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision of June 22, 2018, written by Chief Justice Roberts, holding that the government's acquisition of historical cell-site location records from wireless carriers was a Fourth Amendment search that generally requires a warrant. The Court said individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of their physical movements, called its decision narrow, and said it did not call into question conventional surveillance techniques and tools such as security cameras. It does not address license-plate readers.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
The government obtained historical location records using statutory court orders without a probable-cause warrant.
After the quotation
The majority generally requires a warrant for this acquisition while recognizing case-specific exceptions.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The subject is warrantless acquisition of Carpenter's location records. Roberts's majority reasoning rejects the government's argument that carrier possession removes Fourth Amendment protection. This is legal criticism of the acquisition, not a personal denunciation.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseAnthony Kennedy defends obtaining carrier business records
“The Court has twice held that individuals have no Fourth Amendment interests in business records which are possessed, owned, and controlled by a third party. United States v. Miller, 425 U. S. 435 (1976); Smith v. Maryland, 442 U. S. 735 (1979). This is true even when the records contain personal and sensitive information.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- John Roberts rejects warrantless access to historical cell-site records
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/6550-roberts-rejects-treating-the-carrier-s-possession-of
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "John Roberts rejects warrantless access to historical cell-site records". First published: 2026-10-23. Last updated: 2026-10-23. https://disputeindex.com/events/6550-roberts-rejects-treating-the-carrier-s-possession-of