Using stingrays by United States legislation enforcement is an investigative approach utilized by both federal and local regulation enforcement within the United States to acquire info from cell phones by mimicking a cell phone tower. The gadgets which accomplish this are generically known as IMSI-catchers, however are generally known as stingrays, a model bought by the Harris Corporation. Initially, using stingray telephone trackers was a secret, because of quite a lot of non-disclosure agreements between individual police departments and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In response to the American Civil Liberties Union, itagpro device the FBI entered into agreements with at the very least forty eight police departments in the United States. In these agreements, the FBI allowed police departments to use the stingrays, while requiring police departments present no info to both the general public or the courts concerning the units' operation or existence. In December 2012, the Electronic Privacy Information Center released paperwork which show the United States Department of Justice discussing the use of cellphone monitoring tools, ItagPro together with addressing unlawful interference concerns.

More info on stingrays was obtained in March 2013, when the American Civil Liberties Union launched documents it obtained via a Freedom of data Act request. Stingray devices have been used in quite a lot of criminal investigations, from murder and kidnapping to misdemeanor theft. The best way law enforcement use stingrays has been criticized by a number of civil liberties teams, who have filed lawsuits against current practices. Baltimore, Maryland has a much higher use of stingrays in comparison with different large cities, like Boston, New York City and San Diego. The official position of the US Federal authorities is that using stingrays does not require a possible cause warrant, because they claim stingrays are a type of pen register faucet, which does not require a warrant, iTagPro device as decided in Smith v. Maryland. The federal government notes that they do not intercept the actual dialog, only tracking id of the cellphone and its location. The devices do have the technical capability to document the content of calls, so the federal government requires these content material-intercepting features to be disabled in regular use.

In September 2015, the US Justice Department issued new guidelines requiring federal brokers to acquire warrants earlier than utilizing stingray devices, except in exigent circumstances. Washington state handed an identical legislation. As well as, California, Minnesota and Utah have additionally handed legal guidelines requiring warrants for iTagPro device stingray use. In 2011, in the case of Daniel David Rigmaiden within the U.S. District Court of Arizona, the chief of the FBI Tracking Technology Unit wrote an affidavit defending the usage of an unspecified pen register machine. Information in regards to the mannequin or function was purposefully withheld, iTagPro device citing FBI coverage; the letter assured the court that the machine was legally compliant. Wall Street Journal described the gadget as a "stingray", together with fundamental details about the way it worked. Much of the data on stingray gadgets was provided by Rigmaiden himself, iTagPro features who appeared for the way authorities had found he was committing tax fraud. In January 2016, in the case of United States v. Patrick, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, upheld the warrantless use of a stingray to find the suspect.

On March 30, 2016, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals ruled in Maryland v. Andrews that a warrant is required for using a stingray. This led to the suppression of proof for alleged tried homicide by Andrews. On April 25, 2016, the Baltimore City Circuit Court suppressed evidence collected using a stingray in the trial of alleged homicide suspect Robert Copes. The police had obtained authorization to use a pen register, however the court docket dominated that it was insufficient and so they needed a possible cause warrant. On July 12, 2016, the U.S. District Court of Southern New York dominated in United States v. Lambis that utilizing a stingray constitutes a search that requires a warrant and suppressed the evidence gathered from its use. On August 16, 2016, a complaint was filed to the Federal Communications Commission by the center for Media Justice, Color iTagPro device of Change, iTagPro support and iTagPro support Open Technology Institute regarding the usage of stingrays by the Baltimore Police Department.