NEWYou can now listen to articles!
One Maine lobsterman isn’t ready to give up after the Supreme Court declined to hear his challenge to a GPS vessel-tracking requirement Monday, fearing it threatens a way of life passed down for generations and could ripple across other industries.
For decades, fifth-generation lobsterman Frank Thompson has driven his boat from Vinalhaven, a small island off the Maine coast, into deeper waters to set traps and haul in lobsters. Now, he says a GPS tracking mandate has turned his boat into a government-issued 24/7 “ankle bracelet,” sparking a years-long legal battle over constant surveillance and Fourth Amendment rights.
“This is totally against the Fourth Amendment, and somebody’s got to hear it one way or another,” Thompson told Digital. “This black box that they’re putting aboard the boat is not legal, in my mind, and I’m not a criminal.”
Thompson, who also owns Fox Island Lobster Company with his wife and two sons, was out fishing earlier this month when one of his sons texted him, letting him know the Supreme Court had declined his petition to hear the case and left in place a First Circuit ruling that said the GPS tracking requirement did not violate the Fourth Amendment because lobstering is a closely regulated industry.
THE SURVEILLANCE CAMERA ON YOUR STREET CORNER: LAWFUL SPYING OR CONSTITUTIONALLY PROBLEMATIC?
Maine lobsterman Frank Thompson told Digital a GPS tracking requirement has raised privacy concerns over how the government monitors his boat. (Pacific Legal Foundation.)
“I just told myself, I said, ‘Well, it ain’t over yet,’” he said.
The mandate, requiring a small electronic box to be installed aboard federally licensed lobster boats in Maine, has flipped Thompson’s life upside down, he said.
According to the Maine Department of Marine Resources (Maine DMR), the devices collect a boat’s location once per minute while moving and every six hours while docked. The tracking doesn’t stop there, Thompson said, with the device collecting data even during personal trips, a key concern in his case.
Whether Thompson is traveling back to the mainland or having a family picnic, he said the device gives him “a creepy feeling” about who has his information and who is possibly watching.
“Freedom is gone. What else can they do to us?” he said.
Thompson said there is even more at stake. He described how his first boat ride happened two days after he was born and how his sons and grandchildren are following in his footsteps today.
FLOCK SURVEILLANCE SPREADS ACROSS THE SOUTH AS RED-STATE LAWMAKERS SEEK TO AX ‘1984’-STYLE TRACKING TOOLS
The Supreme Court declined to hear Thompson’s challenge to the GPS tracking requirement on Monday, leaving the lower court’s ruling in place. (Pacific Legal Foundation.)
“Fishing’s been in my blood and I always want to be on the water and it’s something that I couldn’t explain to you the feeling that you get out fishing and stuff,” he said. “It’s just a way of life.”
Thompson equated the feeling of pulling up the line of a trap and catching dozens of lobsters to “opening a present at Christmas time.”
“This is what I like,” he said.
Matthew Gilliam, Thompson’s attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, said lobstermen must carry the trackers “as a condition of earning a living and keeping their lobster license,” arguing the mandate infringes on Fourth Amendment rights “because it was warrantless.”
“That forced trespass was a violation of the Fourth Amendment because it’s an unreasonable search and seizure,” he said.
Maine DMR implemented the rule in 2023 at the direction of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. State officials and conservationists have since backed the mandate as necessary to protect endangered North Atlantic right whales, monitor lobster populations and sustain the industry for years to come.
“They’re bringing it up because it’s for the whales,” Thompson said. “Well, the government’s lying through their teeth like they always do, and I’m not a criminal.”
FORMER PENTAGON AI CHIEF WARNS FLOCK CAMERAS COULD CREATE ‘CHINA-LIKE SURVEILLANCE STATE’ IN THE US
Thompson said the tracking device collects data even when he uses his boat for personal trips. (Pacific Legal Foundation.)
Shortly after the mandate took effect, a federal lawsuit was filed by Thompson and four fellow lobstermen, claiming the device subjected them to tracking they never consented to.
A federal judge dismissed the case, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld that decision, finding the tracking requirement did not violate the Fourth Amendment under an exception for closely regulated industries.
Thompson said the privacy concerns extend beyond fisheries, with the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), which represents farmers and ranchers, standing behind his Supreme Court appeal. The group filed an amicus brief arguing the lower court’s reasoning could weaken Fourth Amendment protections for farmers, ranchers and others in regulated industries.
“Everybody’s got cell phones, they can track us if they want to,” Thompson said. “But put a black box on a tractor, seeing how many days that he’s out in the field or whatever, it’s just, the independence is gone.”
Although the AFBF supported Thompson’s challenge, the Conservation Law Foundation, which filed a separate brief in favor of the tracking requirement during the First Circuit appeal, praised Monday’s decision.
“This decision is a valuable step toward appropriately managing this iconic species,” CLF Associate Attorney Sarah Shahabi said in a press release. Digital reached out to CLF for comment but did not hear back before publication.
TEXAS GOV. GREG ABBOTT MOVES TO CUT STATE FUNDING FOR AI-POWERED FLOCK CAMERAS AMID PRIVACY CONCERNS
Thompson holds the GPS tracking device required aboard his federally licensed lobster boat. (Pacific Legal Foundation)
Maine DMR also responded to the decision, maintaining its support for the tracking requirement in a statement on Monday.
“DMR continues to believe this data collection requirement is critically important to the long-term sustainability of the lobster fishery and resource,” Maine DMR Commissioner Carl Wilson wrote.
Gilliam said that despite the Supreme Court declining to hear the case, lobstermen and others in regulated industries should not lose their privacy rights simply for doing their jobs.
“Lobstermen and others have Fourth Amendment protections and we’ll continue fighting against government overreach,” he said.
Thompson said he still wants answers about why the government is treating lobstermen like they have done something wrong.
“We’re just out there making a living and we’re taking good care of the resource,” Thompson said. “You can’t believe the steps that we’ve done to take care of it and we don’t get credit for nothing.”
He warned that if government regulations continue to be adopted across different fisheries, it could “ruin us.”
“People just don’t think before they react to it,” he said. “All these rules and regulations and it’s taking away a lifestyle of generations of freedom.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE APP
As for what comes next, Thompson said he will continue to work with his lawyers to try to remove the tracking requirement once and for all.
“I’m fighting for everybody, not just myself,” Thompson said. “I’m just fighting for freedom for everybody.”
