Jason S. Crye

Chatrie was decided less than three months ago. Nothing "consistent" could have happened in that period. Of course, we're aware of these cases. In our view, the lower court cases, if they don't go off on standing, don't adequately address the SCOTUS decisions, which, as the law professor you cite acknowledges, call into question the status of Flock searches. This is because both cell phone data and Flock cameras track movements in public spaces in a way that the actual public and police cannot. That is an unprecedented intrusion and ought to require the need to establish exigency and probale cause. We think SCOTUS decisions support this. And we are in the law development business so we don't get nervous if some lower court disagrees. And you can certainly disagree with our view. There are always arguments on the other side. But our view is not "anti-police." It wouldn't gut law enforcement. It's not pro-DSA or BLM. And, no, I don't care what Trump and Kash Patel think. I'm a constitutional conservative. They aren't.