Legal Cyber Academy
Case law repository

In re Application of the United States for Historical Cell Site Data

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Federal circuit court)
Decided
2013
Citation
724 F.3d 600 (5th Cir. 2013)
Standard applied
SCA § 2703(d) — facial constitutionality of compelled disclosure orders
Read the full opinion724 F.3d 600 (5th Cir. 2013) · full text on CourtListener

What the court held

Court orders authorised by the Stored Communications Act compelling cell-phone service providers to produce subscribers' historical cell-site information are not per se unconstitutional. The Fifth Circuit reversed a magistrate judge who had granted the subscriber-information requests but denied sixty days of historical cell-site data on the view that compelled warrantless disclosure of such data always violates the Fourth Amendment.

Why

The court framed the question as a facial challenge to the statutory mechanism rather than a case-specific assessment of a particular collection, and held that the mechanism can be constitutionally applied even if some applications might not be. It noted that the magistrate judge had taken judicial notice of a body of technical material about cell-phone networks drawn from congressional testimony, studies and provider privacy policies to reach the contrary conclusion.

Our reading — not the court’s words

Why this matters in practice

This decision matters less for its outcome, which Carpenter overtook, than for the posture: it was decided on the government's ex parte applications, before any defendant existed to argue the point. That is how much of surveillance law is made, and it is why the technical record a magistrate judge assembles at the application stage can be decisive. For practitioners it is also a reminder that a facial holding leaves as-applied challenges open.

This paragraph is Legal Cyber Academy’s editorial assessment of the decision’s practical importance. The court said none of it. For what the court actually said, read the opinion.

Additional detail

Tags: CSLI · ex parte application · Stored Communications Act

Cited 155times in CourtListener’s corpus at the time this entry was compiled. Treat it as a rough measure of influence, not of correctness.

Summarised from the opinion as retrieved from CourtListener. Reference material, not legal advice. Back to the repository.