If the NFL were to continue using cell phone tracking technology, it would likely violate a 2014 court ruling that found the league was not liable for violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, according to former federal prosecutor John Carlin, who represents several former NFL players.
Carlin was speaking at a hearing at the U.S. District Court in San Francisco today when asked if the league could be sued under the law.
“That’s a question for the court to answer,” he said.
“We believe the court should not have to answer that question,” Carlin added.
The NFL said in a statement today that it will not comment on the matter.
The law says that when a player is arrested, the police officer who arrested him can obtain information on his phone.
However, there is a loophole in that law that allows law enforcement to get cell phone location information from phones used by players.
The league has said that the use of location data will not violate the law and is likely legal.NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy declined to comment on how the league might use location data in a lawsuit against the league.
However, the NFL has been using technology to track and monitor players in recent years, particularly in the aftermath of the Ray Rice domestic violence case, according a report from the Associated Press.
In March 2015, the league used facial recognition software to track down several players who had been arrested for domestic violence and sent them videos of their arrest.
The NFL said it was only interested in using that information to find players that were “in the most trouble” and that was not an endorsement of using that technology to spy on players.
But the practice of using cell location data has come under scrutiny since the Supreme Court’s landmark 2015 decision in Fisher v.
University of Texas that held that the federal Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, commonly known as CALEA, allowed police to use data from cell phones as long as it wasn’t being used to track the person.
That decision sparked a flurry of legal action, including one that led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling in June that said the law does not permit police to collect data from people without a warrant.