New Bill Requires Warrants for Cell Phone Trackers, Limits Police Use to 30 Days Max

The Cell-Site Simulator Warrant Act of 2025 is tackling the use of 'cell-site simulators'—devices often called Stingrays—that law enforcement uses to mimic cell towers. These devices trick your phone into connecting to them, allowing the user to pinpoint your location or potentially intercept communications, often sweeping up data from every phone nearby. This bill essentially slams the brakes on warrantless use of this powerful surveillance tech.

Warrant Required: The New Normal for Digital Tracking

Under this bill, it becomes illegal for federal law enforcement or intelligence agencies to use these simulators without first getting a warrant. This is a huge shift, as it codifies a Fourth Amendment protection for digital tracking. To get that warrant, the agency has to prove to a judge that they’ve already tried and failed with less invasive methods, like just getting standard phone records, or that those methods would be too dangerous. They can’t just go straight to the Stingray. Furthermore, the warrant is only good for a maximum of 30 days—and if the goal is met sooner, they have to stop. This means no more indefinite digital fishing expeditions.

The Emergency Loophole (And Why It’s Tight)

We all know law enforcement needs to move fast sometimes. The bill allows for warrantless use only in genuine emergencies—think immediate threats of death, serious injury, or national security threats. But there’s a catch: they only get 48 hours after starting the surveillance to run to a judge and get an after-the-fact warrant. If the judge denies it, the agency must immediately stop, destroy all the illegally gathered information, and, critically, tell everyone they monitored. For the average person, this means if law enforcement uses this tool to find a missing person, they still have to prove to a judge within two days that the emergency justified the action, putting a tight leash on the exception.

Who Was Tracked? You Get to Know

One of the most significant provisions for everyday privacy is the notification requirement. Within 90 days after a warrant ends, the judge must notify the people named in the application that their device was tracked or communications were intercepted. This is huge for transparency. Right now, most people never know they were the target of this kind of surveillance. While a judge can delay this notice if the government can show 'good cause,' the default is that you eventually find out. This is a massive step toward accountability, ensuring that if your privacy was invaded, you get to know about it.

The 911 Problem and Public Safety

Cell-site simulators can sometimes disrupt local cell service, potentially interfering with emergency calls like 911. This bill forces agencies to be upfront about this risk. When applying for a warrant (or in an emergency), the government must disclose to the court any potential disruptions to commercial or private mobile services. They must also certify that the specific simulator model has been checked by an independent, FCC-recognized lab to verify those disruption estimates. This is a necessary check, ensuring that law enforcement’s need for surveillance doesn't inadvertently endanger the public by cutting off access to emergency services.

Exceptions and Penalties

While the bill tightens the screws on law enforcement, it carves out a few specific exceptions. For instance, the Secret Service can still use them for protective duties (like securing the President), and correctional facilities can use signal blockers to stop contraband cell phones inside prisons (provided they limit the signal range and post warnings). If an agency violates these rules, the bill allows the harmed individual to sue the government agency responsible. Furthermore, any evidence gathered illegally is generally blocked from being used in court. These enforcement mechanisms give the new rules real teeth, making sure agencies have a strong incentive to follow the warrant requirements.