Ready to Register?

MyLawCLE All-Access Pass

Best choice

Add the All-Access Pass and get this program —
plus 1,000+ live CLE programs every year.


All specialty & ethics credits included
38 practice areas
New sections: AI & the Law, Practice Management
100s of current and trending legal topics
Nationally recognized and highly experienced presenters

$395 / year — this program included
Register with the All-Access Pass

This program + 1,000+ CLE programs, all year

Or register for just this program

Live Video Broadcast

Live webinar of this one program.
$195 Register

On-Demand Video

Recorded access + self-study credit.
$195 Register

Location-Data Demands After Chatrie: What Custodians Can Challenge and How

A government demand for location data reaches your client, and Chatrie has changed the rules. Learn to test each demand, find the governing circuit standard, sequence objections up to a motion to quash, and advise clients on whether and how to object.

2026-12-09 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-09 12:00:00

2026-12-09 12:00:00

2h CLE Credits

2026-12-09 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-09 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-09 12:00:00

Over 1,000+ webinars

2026-12-09 12:00:00

Course Overview

Chatrie Protected Users' Location Data. It Did Not Give Your Client Standing to Defend It

2026-12-09 12:00:00

In Chatrie v. United States (2026), the Supreme Court held that obtaining a person’s cell phone Location History from a provider is a Fourth Amendment search. The third-party doctrine no longer defeats that privacy interest. Yet the Court sent the case back without deciding whether the warrant was valid. Carriers, app developers, and connected-vehicle providers now answer demands under rules that are only half written.

Assume a custodian can raise its users’ rights, and the objection may fail on standing. Miss a gag-order deadline, and the window to respond closes. Comply with an overbroad geofence step, and the de-anonymization is already done. Apply one uniform policy to every demand, and over-compliance becomes the default.

This program gives custodian counsel a response playbook built for real demands. You leave with a triage method for each instrument, concrete objection categories, and a decision-tree framework. It sequences objections from informal negotiation to a motion to quash under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) and appellate review. You also get a clear view of where demands are heading as geofence requests shift to other custodians.

Format

CLE Credit

2h CLE Credits

Level

Intermediate

Length

2

Key topics that will be covered

01
Chatrie’s Holdings and Gaps
Apply what Chatrie decided about Location History and the third-party doctrine, and plan around the questions the Court left open.
02
The Custodian Standing Problem
Assess whether a custodian can assert its users’ Fourth Amendment rights before you build an objection on them.
03
Alternative Grounds to Object
Raise the statutory and First Amendment arguments custodians use when standing to assert users’ rights falls short.
04
Intake and Triage
Identify the type of instrument, its scope, and any gag-order deadline the moment a demand arrives.
05
Geofence Scope Objections
Challenge particularity, overbreadth, and de-anonymization problems at each step of a geofence warrant.
06
Quash Motions and Escalation
Sequence objections up to a motion to quash under section 2703(d) and appellate review, and avoid over-compliance and uniform policies as demands reach new targets

Program schedule

clock 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm EST

Chatrie and the Custodian: Standing to Object to Demands

This session examines the Supreme Court’s decision in Chatrie v. United States and what it means for carriers, app providers, and other companies that hold location data. Attorneys will learn why the Court rejected the third-party doctrine for Location History, why custodians often lack standing to raise their users’ Fourth Amendment rights, and the statutory and First Amendment arguments practitioners use instead. Attendees leave able to test any location-data demand against Chatrie, identify the governing circuit standard, and advise clients on whether and how to object.

Laura-Kate BernsteinLaura-Kate Bernstein
clock 1:10 pm - 2:10 pm EST

Responding to a Demand: Objections, Sequencing, and Escalation

This session gives custodian counsel a step-by-step playbook for evaluating and challenging government location-data demands after Chatrie. Attorneys will learn how to identify the legal instrument, spot particularity and overbreadth problems at each step of a geofence warrant, and sequence objections from informal negotiation to a motion to quash under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) and appellate review. Attendees leave with concrete objection categories, a decision-tree framework, and a clear view of where demands are heading as geofence requests shift to other custodians.

Laura-Kate BernsteinLaura-Kate Bernstein
Laura-Kate Bernstein

Laura-Kate Bernstein

ZwillGen

Laura-Kate Bernstein

Laura-Kate Bernstein

ZwillGen

Laura-Kate Bernstein is a Legal Director in ZwillGen’s Washington, D.C. office, where she represents technology companies and online platforms responding to U.S. and international law enforcement requests and third-party subpoenas. A former federal prosecutor with more than a decade at the U.S. Department of Justice, she counsels clients on the Stored Communications Act, the Pen Register Statute, cross-border data requests, and law enforcement response strategy, and she litigates disputes over compelled disclosures and government process.

Education & Credentials

Laura-Kate earned her J.D. from Harvard Law School in 2012. She served as a judicial law clerk at the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and is admitted to practice in Maryland and the District of Columbia.

Recognition & Leadership

Laura-Kate was named to the 2027 Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America in the Commercial Disputes – Data, Cybersecurity category. At the Department of Justice, she served as the Civil Rights Division Criminal Section's leading in-house adviser on electronic evidence gathering, and she trained federal prosecutors and investigators across the country on the Stored Communications Act, the Pen Register Statute, and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Professional Involvement

Laura-Kate writes on law enforcement access to data and online safety. She co-authored ZwillGen's July 2026 analysis of the Chatrie decision, "Supreme Court Holds Geofence Warrants Are Fourth Amendment Searches, But Leaves Other Important Questions for Lower Courts." Her other articles include "TAKE IT DOWN Compliance: Navigating Unanswered Questions" (2026), "Nonconsensual Intimate Imagery on Your Platform? New Federal Law Says to 'Take It Down.'" (2025), and "California Says No Dice: Judge Dismisses State Claims in Social Casino MDL" (2025).

Experience

Laura-Kate joined ZwillGen's Litigation team in 2025 and works on its Law Enforcement & Surveillance practice. She guides companies through compelled disclosure disputes, government process, and interactions with federal and state investigators, drawing on her extensive Department of Justice experience. At the Department of Justice, she held senior roles in the Civil Rights Division and the Criminal Division's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS). She advised on electronic evidence gathering, government surveillance, cross-border data sharing, and cybercrime policy, and she litigated complex constitutional and statutory issues nationwide. Most recently a trial attorney in the Civil Rights Division's Criminal Section, she led federal investigations and prosecutions through jury trials and prosecuted cyber-enabled and fraud-related offenses. Her litigation practice also covers class actions, mass arbitrations, and other disputes involving privacy, cybersecurity, and consumer protection, with an emphasis on resolving matters efficiently while limiting business disruption. She counsels technology companies and online platforms on the TAKE IT DOWN Act and other emerging online safety and content moderation requirements.
Laura-Kate Bernstein

Laura-Kate Bernstein

ZwillGen

Laura-Kate Bernstein is a Legal Director in ZwillGen’s Washington, D.C. office, where she represents technology companies and online platforms responding to U.S. and international law enforcement requests and third-party subpoenas. A former federal prosecutor with more than a decade at the U.S. Department of Justice, she counsels clients on the Stored Communications Act, the Pen Register Statute, cross-border data requests, and law enforcement response strategy, and she litigates disputes over compelled disclosures and government process.

Education & Credentials

Laura-Kate earned her J.D. from Harvard Law School in 2012. She served as a judicial law clerk at the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and is admitted to practice in Maryland and the District of Columbia.

Recognition & Leadership

Laura-Kate was named to the 2027 Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America in the Commercial Disputes – Data, Cybersecurity category. At the Department of Justice, she served as the Civil Rights Division Criminal Section's leading in-house adviser on electronic evidence gathering, and she trained federal prosecutors and investigators across the country on the Stored Communications Act, the Pen Register Statute, and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Professional Involvement

Laura-Kate writes on law enforcement access to data and online safety. She co-authored ZwillGen's July 2026 analysis of the Chatrie decision, "Supreme Court Holds Geofence Warrants Are Fourth Amendment Searches, But Leaves Other Important Questions for Lower Courts." Her other articles include "TAKE IT DOWN Compliance: Navigating Unanswered Questions" (2026), "Nonconsensual Intimate Imagery on Your Platform? New Federal Law Says to 'Take It Down.'" (2025), and "California Says No Dice: Judge Dismisses State Claims in Social Casino MDL" (2025).

Experience

Laura-Kate joined ZwillGen's Litigation team in 2025 and works on its Law Enforcement & Surveillance practice. She guides companies through compelled disclosure disputes, government process, and interactions with federal and state investigators, drawing on her extensive Department of Justice experience. At the Department of Justice, she held senior roles in the Civil Rights Division and the Criminal Division's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS). She advised on electronic evidence gathering, government surveillance, cross-border data sharing, and cybercrime policy, and she litigated complex constitutional and statutory issues nationwide. Most recently a trial attorney in the Civil Rights Division's Criminal Section, she led federal investigations and prosecutions through jury trials and prosecuted cyber-enabled and fraud-related offenses. Her litigation practice also covers class actions, mass arbitrations, and other disputes involving privacy, cybersecurity, and consumer protection, with an emphasis on resolving matters efficiently while limiting business disruption. She counsels technology companies and online platforms on the TAKE IT DOWN Act and other emerging online safety and content moderation requirements.

Credits by state

AK2.0
AL2.0
AR2.0
AZ2.0
CA2.0
CO2.0
CT2.0
DC2.0
DE2.0
FL2.0
GA2.0
HI2.0
IA2.0
ID2.0
IL2.0
IN2.0
KS2.0
KY2.0
LA2.0
MA2.0
MD2.0
ME2.0
MI2.0
MN2.0
MO2.4
MS2.0
MT2.0
NC2.0
ND2.0
NE2.0
NH120.0
NJ2.0
NM2.0
NV2.0
NY2.0
OH2.0
OK2.5
OR2.0
PA2.0
RI2.5
SC2.0
SD2.0
TN2.0
TX2.0
UT2.0
VA2.0
VT2.0
WA2.0
WI2.0
WV2.4
WY2.0

Upcoming Live Online CLE Broadcasts

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

10,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

MCLE Credits

Alabama
Pending
Alaska
Approved
Arizona
Approved
Arkansas
Approved
California
Approved
Colorado
Pending
Connecticut
Approved
Delaware
Pending
District of Columbia
No Required
Florida
Approved
Georgia
Pending
Hawaii
Approved
Idaho
Pending
Illinois
Pending
Indiana
Pending
Iowa
Pending
Kansas
Pending
Kentucky
Pending
Louisiana
Pending
Maine
Pending
Maryland
No Required
Massachusetts
No Required
Michigan
No Required
Minnesota
Pending
Mississippi
Pending
Missouri
Approved
Montana
Pending
Nebraska
Pending
Nevada
Pending
New Hampshire
Approved
New Jersey
Approved
New Mexico
Approved
New York
Approved
North Carolina
Pending
North Dakota
Approved
Ohio
Pending
Oklahoma
Pending
Oregon
Pending
Pennsylvania
Approved
Rhode Island
Pending
South Carolina
Pending
South Dakota
No Required
Tennessee
Pending
Texas
Approved
Utah
Pending
Vermont
Approved
Virginia
Not Eligible
Washington
Approved
West Virginia
Pending
Wisconsin
Pending
Wyoming
Pending

Alabama

Requirements

The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.  

Formats

  • Attorneys can earn unlimited “live” credit through live seminars, live webcasts, and co-sponsored locations with MyLAWCLE-Alabama approved programs
  • Attorneys are limited to 6 credits per compliance period of “online” programs through MyLAwCLE On-Demand programs