Supreme Court weighs ‘geofence warrants’ for cellphone data
The US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, April 20, 2026. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — For generations, cops have obtained warrants to lawfully seek information from a specific suspect in a crime.
The Supreme Court on Monday is considering whether investigators can also use so-called “geofence warrants” to do the reverse — scanning cell phone data of thousands of innocent individuals in hopes of finding a suspect to apprehend.
The landmark case is the first time the justices will consider whether the controversial practice of digital dragnets, which have grown in popularity among law enforcement with advances in technology, violate constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.
Critics say the warrants intrude on Americans’ reasonable expectation of privacy by compelling service providers to turn over broad swaths of user location history and time stamps within a specified area over a specified timeframe.
Advocates for geofence warrants call them a critical tool that will help police more quickly solve crimes, in turn making communities safer. They also emphasize that most cellphone users knowingly transmit location data to third-party tech companies already.
The petitioner in the case, Okello Chatrie, was indicted on charges related to an armed robbery of a Virginia credit union in 2019 and wants key cellphone location evidence against him thrown out.
Authorities relied heavily on data obtained from Google under a geofence warrant that placed Chatrie’s cellphone within 150 meters of the bank during the crime.
The Trump administration, which is defending the law enforcement tool and Chatrie’s prosecution, argues that by sharing location information with apps and service providers like Google, a person forfeits any expectation of privacy.
A decision in the case — Chatrie v U.S. — is expected by the end of June.
Former President Barack Obama during a campaign event for Representative Mikie Sherrill, Democratic gubernatorial candidate for New Jersey, Saturday, Nov. 1, 2025. (Adam Gray/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Barack Obama, in a video shared exclusively with ABC News, called on Virginians to vote in favor of a redistricting measure that could give Democrats a boost in the 2026 midterms if it passes.
“By voting yes, you can push back against the Republicans trying to give themselves an unfair advantage in the midterms,” Obama said in the video shared with ABC News. “By voting yes, you can take a temporary step to level the playing field. And we’re counting on you.”
Over a million Virginians have voted early already, according to the Virginia Public Access Project, in an April 21 statewide referendum that will decide if the Democratic-controlled legislature should be allowed to redraw the state’s congressional map.
That would allow the legislature to implement a map it already advanced that would reconfigure four congressional seats to favor Democrats, which could be decisive in the midterm elections for the U.S. House of Representatives given Republicans’ current slim majority.
Democrats — including Obama, who previously starred in an advertisement for the “yes” side — have argued that it’s a necessary counterweight to mid-decade redistricting in 2025 that redrew nine seats to favor Republicans.
Republicans and other opponents of the redistricting gambit, which is also still facing a court challenge even as the election was allowed to proceed, have slammed the move as unfair to a large swath of Virginia voters. President Donald Trump received 46% of the vote in Virginia in the 2024 election.
“Virginia is a very purple state, and there’s a wide variety of voices in Virginia,” U.S. Rep. Jen Kiggans, a Republican whose district is redrawn by the proposed new map, told ABC News. “And for one political party to come in and assume that it’s their way or the highway, and to force that down Virginians’ throats — this will come back to bite them.”
The “Yes” side has fundraised and spent millions more on advertisements than the “No” side, according to campaign finance filings and an analysis by AdImpact. It’s also been bolstered by celeb power from figures such as Kerry Washington, John Legend and Pusha T.
Yet polling has still shown a close race, despite the seeming momentum behind the “Yes” efforts. A Washington Post-Schar School poll conducted in late March, after early voting had begun in the state, found that 52% of likely voters in the referendum supported the move, while 47% were opposed — a result just outside the poll’s margin of error.
Why does it appear so close? J. Miles Coleman, a political expert and analyst at the University of Virginia Center for Politics, told ABC News that could be in part because for Democrats, the stakes may not seem as high as they are for Republicans.
“For Democrats, it would be nice to have these four extra seats out of Virginia if this map gets passed,” he said. “But I just think probably something driving enthusiasm on the Republican side is that, from their point of view, this vote probably seems more existential … they lost their statewide seats last year in a drubbing. They could very well stand to lose a lot of their federal representation.”
But Obama, in the video shared with ABC News, framed the stakes as having national importance.
“By voting yes, you have the chance to do something important — not just for the Commonwealth, but for our entire country,” Obama said in the video.
(The video also serves as a way for Obama to reaffirm his support for the ballot measure, after allies of his harshly criticized mailers that used old quotes from Obama about redistricting to portray him as against the initiative.)
Some Democrats are not onboard.
Outside of an early polling site in Virginia on Thursday, Geoff Warrington, who works in tech and identified himself as a Democrat, told ABC News he had chosen to vote no because he believes it is “relatively unfair to essentially have redistricting temporarily to reallocate seats to sway an election.”
But for some Democratic “yes” voters, the referendum is a way for Democrats to be able to strike back while being locked out of power in the White House and Congress.
“I mean, the Republicans have been playing dirty, so I think the Democrats are good to play dirty,” Adan Hernandez, an engineer, told ABC News at a separate early voting site in Virginia on Thursday.
.S. President Donald Trump (L) speaks as newly sworn in U.S. Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin and his wife Christie Mullin look on during a ceremony in the Oval Office at the White House on March 24, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Strikes continued across the Middle East on Tuesday amid uncertainty over the state of talks between the U.S. and Iran, after President Donald Trump touted progress on negotiations while Tehran denied any dialogue.
Just days after he insisted there was no leadership left to talk to in Iran, Trump on Monday announced the U.S. and Iran held discussions over the weekend and as a result he was postponing major attacks he’d threatened on Tehran’s energy infrastructure.
“We have had very, very strong talks,” Trump told reporters. “We’ll see where they lead. But we have … major points of agreement.”
Steve Witkoff, White House special envoy, and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, led the talks for the U.S. side, according to Trump. Trump did not identify who the U.S. was negotiating with in Iran, but said it is not the new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei.
Trump said a meeting would take place “soon.”
Iran, on the other hand, publicly denied any talks have taken place. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s speaker of Parliament, said Trump’s claims were an attempt to influence markets suffering from Iran’s stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz.
The Trump administration is not confirming if and when in-person talks will take place between U.S. and Iranian officials in the coming days.
“These are sensitive diplomatic discussions, and the United States will not negotiate through the press. This is a fluid situation, and speculation about meetings should not be deemed as final until they are formally announced by the White House,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement provided to ABC News.
Pakistan has positioned itself as a mediator between the U.S. and Iran.
A Pakistani official familiar with the negotiations told ABC News that there are “several proposals” floating around regarding the next steps for talks and said an in-person meeting in Islamabad is on the table.
Trump on Tuesday shared to his social media platform a post from Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who wrote on X: “Pakistan welcomes and fully supports ongoing efforts to pursue dialogue to end the WAR in the Middle East, in the interest of peace and stability in region and beyond.”
“Subject to concurrence by US and Iran, Pakistan stands ready and honoured to be the host to facilitate meaningful and conclusive talks for a comprehensive settlement of the ongoing conflict,” Sharif’s post read.
The Pakistani official said Turkey and Egypt are also helping to facilitate the talks between the U.S. and Iran.
The official said the talks would likely take place within the next five days in accordance with Trump’s social media post — suggesting military strikes on Iranian power plants were “paused” for the next five days as Tehran and Washington engage in diplomatic negotiations. The official cautioned nothing is final as of yet.
A spokesperson for the Embassy of Pakistan in Washington declined to comment. The Egypt and Turkish embassies have not responded to requests for comment.
The Turkish foreign minister said last Thursday that his country was talking to both the U.S. and Iran to understand where the two nations stand.
The State Department referred to the White House when asked if Witkoff, Kushner and Vice President JD Vance were expected to travel to Islamabad later this week to meet with Iranian officials, as Reuters has reported. Vance’s office has not responded to a request for comment.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday said he had spoken with Trump, and said Trump believes there “is an opportunity to leverage the tremendous achievements we have attained with the U.S. military to realize the war’s objectives in an agreement — an agreement that will safeguard our vital interests.”
In the meantime, Netanyahu said Israel will “continue to strike both in Iran and in Lebanon. We are crushing the missile program and the nuclear program, and continue to inflict severe blows on Hezbollah.”
President Trump earlier Monday said that Israel would be “very happy” when asked if he believed Israel would abide by a negotiated peace deal.
Meanwhile, thousands more U.S. Marines and several Navy ships are heading to the Middle East, and the Pentagon is seeking $200 billion in supplemental funding.
Protesters gather in front of the The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts after President Donald Trump’s name was added to the facade on Dec.20, 2025 in Washington, DC. Photo by Maxine Wallace/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled Saturday mostly in favor of Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, in her effort to obtain more details about the planned closure and renovation of the Kennedy Center, which is set for a board vote at the White House on Monday.
Judge Christopher Cooper also ruled that as a trustee, Beatty must be afforded a “meaningful opportunity to provide input” and not be “categorically barred” from speaking at the meeting, which President Donald Trump is set to chair.
But Cooper stopped short of requiring at this stage that Beatty be permitted to cast a vote as a trustee, saying that is a “trickier question” with no clearcut answers.
“As the foregoing facts suggest, a project of this salience and magnitude—which threatens to involve at least some demolition and reconstruction of a major national memorial and active performing arts theater—does not happen overnight,” Cooper said in his ruling.
The judge directed the government to provide Beatty with materials on the project ahead of the Monday meeting.
“The government’s assertion, both in its briefing and at the hearing, that such information is ‘preliminary’ and not yet sufficiently ‘finalized’ to share with the full slate of decisionmakers—just four days before the Board is set to vote on a complete, two-year closure of the Center they are statutorily charged with overseeing—borders on preposterous,” Cooper said.
Beatty’s pending lawsuit challenges the renaming of the Kennedy Center to the Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, as well as the pending closure and renovations. Cooper said the court will address those issues at a later date.
“No president has the authority to shut Congress out of the governance of the Kennedy Center, much less unilaterally rename or demolish it,” Beatty said in a statement Saturday. “We will not stand by while an important part of our national heritage is jeopardized, and I intend to make that clear at next week’s board meeting.”
The White House didn’t immediately have a comment about the ruling.
Asked for comment on the lawsuit previously, White House spokesperson Liz Huston told ABC News in a statement that the Kennedy Center’s board voted to rename it after Trump “stepped up and saved the old Kennedy Center.”
As for whether a sitting member of the House who serves on the Kennedy Center board as a function of her office can vote, Judge Cooper said that the legal argument in Beatty’s favor is strong, but how the board has operated in practice in that respect is not clear.
Some veterans of the Kennedy Center recalled ex-officio members of the board voting, while others say they never observed that.
The board approved a bylaws change last May to delineate presidentially-appointed general trustees from “nonvoting” ex-officio members.
“Though the Court thinks that Beatty has the better statutory argument as to both participation and the right to vote, her battle for emergency relief on these fronts is not yet won,” Cooper ruled.
