Maine Becomes Second State To Prohibit Warantless Cellphone Tracking

Maine Becomes Second State To Prohibit Warantless Cellphone Tracking
Published: 12 Jul, 2013
2 min read

In response to the growing privacy concerns, local law enforcement agencies in Maine are now required to have a warrant to track cell phone activity.  Passed on Tuesday, LD415 reads: "a government entity may not obtain location information without a valid warrant issued by a duly authorized judge or justice."

It defines government entity as "a state or local agency," clarifying that federal agencies are not bound by the warantless cellphone tracking state laws.

The law goes on to mandate that in the event that law enforcement agencies do obtain a search warrant, that they notify the user within three days of tracking "unless they can prove that secrecy is necessary in order to delay the notification for an unspecified period."

Unlike many laws attempting to protect the privacy of cell-phone users, Maine's new warrantless cellphone tracking law extends the requirement for a warrant to the history of location information, meaning that law enforcement agencies cannot snoop into a users phone records for past locations or check-in information.

This is a clear departure from the Department of Justice's interpretation of the Fourth Amendment as made clear in a brief filed on the applications of the United States of America for historical cell-site data. In the brief, the DOJ specifically argues that "customers have no protected privacy interest in historical cell-site records," citing United States v. Miller (1976).

Their reasoning lies in the fact that historical cell-phone records are stored by cell phone companies, or third-parties, and “the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the obtaining of information revealed to a third party and conveyed by him to Government authorities" (United States v. Miller).

There is only one state ahead of Maine in the fight against warrantless cellphone tracking: Montana. Historically becoming the first in the nation to pass such legislation in late June, Montana's law also requires law enforcement to obtain a probable cause warrant before tracking a person "based on his or her cell phone location information, social networking check-ins, or via a GPS tracking device in a criminal investigation," the ACLU reports.

On the privacy front, other states making history include Texas, which just became the first state to enact legislation requiring law enforcement to obtain a warrant in order to sift through people's personal emails.

With states taking the lead with privacy protection laws, it's only a matter of time before Congress responds.

IVP Donate

You Might Also Like

New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
Using verified California voter file data, IVP surveyed high-propensity voters from February 13 through 20. The poll tested first-choice ballot preferences alongside issue intensity on affordability and the cost of living, immigration enforcement, more choice reform, and more....
23 Feb, 2026
-
10 min read
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
Polls consistently show that nearly all Americans across the political spectrum agree that there is too much money in politics – whether from foreign sources, corporations, or so-called “dark money” groups. ...
23 Feb, 2026
-
13 min read
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
The overlap between committee assignments and stock ownership is not automatically illegal. Because the current legal framework permits this proximity as long as disclosure rules are followed, lawmakers are not operating under a system that forces change....
20 Feb, 2026
-
4 min read