The Feds Are Skirting the Fourth Amendment by Buying Data
The government needs a warrant to spy on you. So agencies are paying tech companies to do it instead.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees that every person shall be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." This means government agents cannot enter your home or rifle through your stuff without a warrant, signed by a judge and based on probable cause. That right extends to the digital sphere: The Supreme Court ruled in 2018's Carpenter v. United States that the government must have a warrant to track people's movements through their cellphone data.
But governments are increasingly circumventing these protections by using taxpayer dollars to pay private companies to spy on citizens. Government agencies have found many creative and enterprising ways to skirt the Fourth Amendment.
Cellphones generate reams of information about us even when they're just in our pockets, including revealing our geographical locations—information that is then sold by third-party brokers. In 2017 and 2018, the IRS Criminal Investigation unit (IRS CI) purchased access to a commercial database containing geolocation data from millions of Americans' cellphones. A spokesman said IRS CI only used the data for "significant money-laundering, cyber, drug and organized-crime cases" and terminated the contract when it failed to yield any useful leads.
During the same time period, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) paid more than $1 million for access to cellphone geolocation databases in an attempt to detect undocumented immigrants entering the country. The Wall Street Journal reported that ICE had used this information to identify and arrest migrants.
In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention spent $420,000 on location data in order to track "compliance" with "movement restrictions," such as curfews, as well as to "track patterns of those visiting K-12 schools."
The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) admitted in a January 2021 memo that it purchases "commercially available geolocation metadata aggregated from smartphones" and that it had searched the database for Americans' movement histories "five times in the past two-and-a-half years." The memo further stipulated that "DIA does not construe the Carpenter decision to require a judicial warrant endorsing purchase or use of commercially available data for intelligence purposes."
Even in the physical world, governments have contracted out their spying. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) spent millions of dollars paying employees at private companies and government agencies for personal information that would otherwise require a warrant. This included paying an administrator at a private parcel delivery service to search people's packages and send them to the DEA, and paying an Amtrak official for travel reservation information. In the latter case, the DEA already had an agreement in place under which Amtrak Police would provide that information for free, but the agency instead spent $850,000 over two decades paying somebody off.
It seems the only thing more enterprising than a government agent with a warrant is a government agent without one.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "How the Feds Buy Their Way Around the Fourth Amendment."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The 4th Amendment is a threat to [our] democracy.
It doesn’t exist in today’s US [Na]tional So[zi]alist nation. Today; whomever can rile-up the most [WE]-gangster greedy & selfish members to their gang gets to set the definition of the US and go out and violate human rights to their hearts desire. It really should be renamed the USDSA (United States of Democratic Socialist America) to keep it from being confused with the Nation that has been conquered and destroyed.
My hope is someday the people of this nation will stop buying the [Na]tional So[zi]alist propaganda and return to what this nation is suppose to be which is defined in the U.S. Constitution and summarized by holding Individual Liberty and Justice for all - above - [WE] gangs of selfishness and greed and who can STEAL the most from their neighbors with gov-guns.
Or in other words…
The USA is *NOT* a ‘democracy’.
It’s a *Constitutional* Union of Republican States.
Private companies own the government, all governments.
They do it under the cover of lies and secrecy.
BY DEFINITION, our inalienable rights can’t be bought, sold or given away TO ANYONE.
NDA’s violate free speech.
Cmon. You know you want to say jews.
What for?
Whenever I want to, I do.
Refuted!
Nice try, Joe.
It is not 'spying' because we freely give up our data in exchange for convenience.
"private companies" and all that jazz.
(Sort of like clickbait headlines in online sites)
We need more government to protect us from government.
Seems to me almost unenforceable. No matter what laws they pass, the burrocrats will find a way around them, and the courts will back their fellow burrocrats until it becomes politically unfeasible and the legislature passes new laws.
Same problem as enforcing the Second Amendment, especially as regards suing gun manufacturers for legal and safe tools being misused by criminals. Courts would throw out such lawsuits against car manufacturers when drunk drivers kill people, but the Supreme Court tolerates it because Commerce Clause or something. Strange how liberty suddenly becomes super duper important when it becomes the right to violate the right to keep and bear arms.
It's the usual problem of no penalty for violating the Constitution and laws by government itself. The whole point of the Constitution is to safeguard natural rights.
The Constitution was a good first draft, but it left out any recourse by We, the People other than meaningless votes every few years. The only way I can see to fix that is letting people challenge all laws and regulations, by themselves, without the involvement of any courts or burrocrats. Convene a jury of random adults, let them listen to pro and con, then retire to individual rooms and write down what the think the law or regulation does. If they cannot unanimously agree on that, void the law or regulation, erase it from the books, and whatever politicians write it or voted for it, or whatever burrocrats wrote it or enforced it -- throw them all out of employment, ban them from ever again working for the government even indirectly.
Kind of amazing how dependent we are on smartphones when you consider the first iPhone came out in 2007 and the first Galaxy in 2009. These things are less than twenty years old, and there's so much you simply can't do without one.
What can't be done without a phone?
My kid had their phone stollen in London on a senior trip. It was amazing how quickly life screeched to a stop. From the boutique hotel whose doors opened with a phone app, to the fact that a phone agent at the bank was unwilling to help without first sending a 2FA code to the (stolen) phone via SMS.
To be fair, my kid was able to power through, using a bunch of fallback methods. But they were extremely inconvenient and included things like using imessage on a macbook, which isn't really an improvement.
I would not say you CAN'T do these things without a phone, but it is increasingly difficult to do so.
In order to log onto my work's network I need to use an app. So I literally can't do my job without smartphone. I like to go to concerts a few times a year, and if you want paper tickets you must pay extra. That's if they even offer them. So the only way to get inside is with a QR code on the phone. Went to the beach on Sunday and had to prepay for parking. The only way to extend the parking if I was to stay later than originally anticipated was with an app. Some things don't have a workaround.
I've bought tickets for shows that were electronic tickets only.
Last show I went to, the AXS app had logged me out and I didn't know the password. After a moment of panic I remembered that the QR code was in an email, so I was able to get in.
More and more sites are using multifactor authentication that require an app.
Same as Sarc above, when I log into the network at work I have to use a MFA app. When I log into the medical database I manage at work I have to use an app. When I log into the database vendor’s support portal, well that one sends a code to my email. Which I have to use a MFA app to access.
I “lost” my phone at Heathrow airport last year on a trip to Greece. (As far as I’m concerned the shuttle driver absconded with it, when he just as easily could have handed it to the plane steward. He answered the phone just before he pulled off and told me he wouldn’t do it).
Right at the beginning of the vacation. We still had my wife’s phone, and we’d pre-printed a bunch of paper itineraries, thank Christ. But essentially my phone and my email had all the relevant airline, airbnb, event tickets, etc. and the apps necessary to use them on it.
And the first thing I learned is the layer upon layer of catch 22s when you’re out of the country without your own phone and you’re trying to access these apps and things through a different phone. Security features make it Nigh on impossible. You can’t get into one thing without the other thing. I only managed to get back into my email by calling Yahoo and paying them for the privilege. Because you have to get confirmation on your phone (missing), your pad device (halfway across the world) or email (can’t get in without the confirmation) etc. I still ended up losing a few hundred dollars in tour tickets I couldn’t access.
Anyway, lesson is pre-print your itineraries and hotel stuff. It’s the only thing that got me through that first couple days.
On a work trip to DC last week, spent some time in Annapolis.
– Can’t park in downtown Annapolis without scanning a QR code. No cash accepted, no physical credit cards accepted.
– First Annapolis restaurant we went into to get a drink (a) only accepted payments by phone app or a tap-enabled credit card, and (b) didn’t serve beer. We walked out.
– Couldn’t access work-related anything online without two factor authentication.
– At DC airport (Reagan National), Delta was down to one counter agent to serve all customers at check in. They expect everyone to manage it through the kiosk. The kiosk no longer accepts even a Real ID driver’s license to find your reservation, it wants you to put your phone face down on the scanner instead.
– Got back home, went to eat breakfast at Denny’s. They still take cash and credit cards so I still eat there. But our regular waitress told us she’d be in trouble with her boss if she didn’t get two customers to do a phone survey every shift. Gave her my phone so she could rate herself.
So the Government shouldn't be allowed to purchase commercially available public data? No, but perhaps if the data weren't available you would have a point.
Modern idiocy:
"I want everyone to know what I think and what I am doing!"
"I don't want the government to know what I think and what I am doing!"
"I want the government to know what everyone else is thinking and doing!"
IMHO, the easy test makes things incredibly difficult for the government, which is why they don't want the easy test. But oh well.
If the government is not permitted to "do" something:
1) It is not permitted to hire a government agent to do that thing.
2) It is not permitted to pay a contractor to do that thing.
3) It is not permitted to induce a private individual to do a thing (whether that is done with appeals via money or implied promises of favor).
So what is this case? Any FBI agent is allowed to go and ask you for this data, and it is up to you to say whether you will surrender it. Therefore they are allowed to pay a 3rd party to go to you and surrender this information.
Without a doubt, this information is Constitutionally available to the government.
JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS CONSTITUTIONAL DOESN'T MEAN IT IS A GOOD IDEA!
The way to remedy this is with legislation that makes it illegal for third parties to sell this information to the government, disallows 3rd party contracts (i.e. User Licensing Agreements, etc) that preemptively grant permission to share this data with the government, and that requires the company to get permission from the targeted individual before they transfer the data to the government for any other reason.
Note that this doesn't apply when the government has secured a warrant for the information, which is its own mess that needs to be fixed through legislation.
"The Feds Are Skirting the Fourth Amendment by Buying Data."
This is not news.
Both republicans and democrats have violated the US Constitution for decades.
" U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) paid more than $1 million for access to cellphone geolocation databases… to detect undocumented immigrants entering the country. The Wall Street Journal reported that ICE had used this information to identify and arrest migrants."
Another good reason to enter legally and apply for citizenship.