The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a constitutional challenge brought by a Maine lobsterman who argued that mandatory round-the-clock satellite tracking on his boat violates his Fourth Amendment rights against warrantless searches.
The decision leaves in place an appellate ruling upholding regulations that require roughly 1,200 federally licensed lobster harvesters in Maine to mount electronic tracking units on their vessels. The devices record locations every minute when a vessel moves and every six hours when it sits at a dock.
A battle over continuous location tracking
Frank Thompson, a fifth-generation fisherman based on the island of Vinalhaven, filed the lawsuit alongside four other lobstermen after the rule took effect in December 2023. Thompson, who operates Fox Island Lobster Company with his family, said the monitors act like government ankle monitors that follow him even during off-duty travel, medical emergencies and family outings.
Thompson told Fox News Digital that he learned of the high court’s rejection from his son while out on the water. “I just told myself, I said, ‘Well, it ain’t over yet,’” Thompson said to the outlet, adding that he intends to keep working with his legal team to challenge the policy.
His legal counsel at the Pacific Legal Foundation argued that the state requirement amounts to an unconstitutional physical trespass and unreasonable search, pointing out that fishermen risk forfeiting their commercial licenses if they refuse to carry the trackers.
A federal judge in Bangor initially dismissed the case, citing jurisdictional grounds, Maine Public reported. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit subsequently upheld the rule, concluding the tracking did not breach Fourth Amendment safeguards because commercial lobstering qualifies as a closely regulated industry.
Conservation goals and expanding privacy fears
State regulators and conservation advocates have defended the mandate as essential for managing ocean resources. The Maine Department of Marine Resources instituted the rule under guidance from the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.
Carl Wilson, commissioner of the state department, said in a statement that the agency views the location data as critical to the long-term health of the fishery. Proponents and regulators maintain the figures offer vital insights into harvesting patterns and help prevent vessel interactions with endangered North Atlantic right whales, according to reporting from Maine Public.
The Conservation Law Foundation praised the court action, with associate attorney Sarah Shahabi calling the decision a positive measure toward safeguarding the marine species, Fox News reported.
However, the dispute drew attention from industries outside maritime trades. The American Farm Bureau Federation filed an amicus brief warning that applying the closely regulated industry doctrine to vessel tracking could erode Fourth Amendment protections for farmers and ranchers if states mandate similar devices on agricultural equipment.
Future legal questions remain
Attorneys representing Thompson pointed out that recent Supreme Court rulings have expanded protections for digital location details in criminal contexts, contrasting those findings with the lower court standard applied to fishermen. While the justices chose not to review Thompson’s petition, his attorneys said they expect similar constitutional issues to return as regulatory agencies increasingly adopt automated monitoring systems across other professions.
