Chatrie v. United States · ¶59
The Government contests that conclusion on Carpenter’s second axis alone: It claims that generating Location History, unlike producing CSLI, is a voluntary choice on the user’s part. Although carrying a cell phone may be indispensable in modern society, the Government argues, using Location History is not. Rather, Location History is an “optional add-on,” which a user must enable by an “affirmative act” beyond “powering up” a phone. Brief for United States 13, 22 (quoting Carpenter, 585 U. S., at 315). In support, the Government emphasizes that only around one-third of current Google accountholders have activated the service. See Brief for United States 22; see 1 App. 45. That goes to show, says the Government, that people can “live[] without” Location History. Brief for United States 22; see Tr. of Oral Arg. 92. And if that is true (the Government says), people who do use the feature…Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.