A federal judge in Nevada has determined that “tower dumps,” which involve police collecting data from all phones connected to specific cell towers over a certain timeframe, violate the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. This amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures. Despite this ruling, the judge allowed evidence obtained through this method in a particular case, noting that the officers acted in good faith and were unaware that their actions were unconstitutional, according to a report by 404 Media and Court Watch. Cell towers routinely track and log the identifiers of nearby mobile devices approximately every seven seconds.
When authorities request a tower dump, they effectively compel telecom providers to provide the phone numbers and specific identifying information of all devices connected to a tower during a defined period. In densely populated areas, this can result in the collection of data from tens of thousands of individuals simultaneously, regardless of the user’s telecom carrier, be it AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile. Law enforcement has utilized tower dumps as a tool in criminal investigations. However, this method has faced scrutiny for its broad scope, as it can capture information from anyone in the vicinity, not just targeted suspects.
This practice raises significant concerns regarding the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches. The ruling was prompted by the case of Cory Spurlock, accused of marijuana distribution and involvement in a murder-for-hire plot. Investigators used a tower dump to place Spurlock’s phone at various crime scenes. Although the police obtained a warrant, they argued that the data collection was not a search under the Constitution.
Judge Miranda M. Du of the US District Court disagreed, asserting that such data collection constitutes a search, classifying the warrant as a general warrant, which is prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. However, she allowed the evidence, citing the good faith exception, as officers believed at the time that they were operating lawfully. This case marks an important milestone regarding the constitutionality of tower dumps, although similar rulings have emerged from other courts as well.