{"id":894,"date":"2026-07-02T14:08:58","date_gmt":"2026-07-02T14:08:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894"},"modified":"2026-07-02T14:08:58","modified_gmt":"2026-07-02T14:08:58","slug":"scotus-just-issued-its-biggest-privacy-ruling-in-nearly-a-decade","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n\n
\"A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

The Supreme Court<\/span> dealt Big Brother a blow on Monday with a landmark ruling for digital privacy rights in Chatrie v. United States<\/em>. Conservative Justices John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch joined the liberal blocof Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jacksonin finding that smartphone location data is subject to privacy protections under the Fourth Amendment. Though consequential, the case has gone largely overlooked amid this week\u2019s deluge of high-profile rulings, including the decision to block President Donald Trump\u2019s 2025 executive order attempting to overturn the guarantee of birthright citizenship. It marks the Court\u2019s first decision on digital surveillance since 2018, when it found that law enforcement\u2019s warrantless search of cell site location history violated the Fourth Amendment.<\/p>

Read more I\u2019d Seen It From The Ground, But Wait Until You See It From The Sky<\/a><\/p>\n

To better understand the implications of Chatrie<\/em>, I hopped on the phone with Stevie Glaberson, director of research and advocacy at Georgetown Law\u2019s Center on Privacy and Technology. The Center filed an amicus brief in the case alongside the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU. Glaberson helped break down Chatrie <\/em>and what the Court\u2019s ruling means in an age of growing digital surveillance.<\/p>\n

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.<\/em><\/p>\n

At the center of <\/strong>Chatrie <\/em>is<\/strong> law enforcement\u2019s use of a \u201cgeofence warrant\u201d to identify the potential suspect of a bank robbery in 2019. What are geofence<\/strong> warrants, and how do they differ from regular search warrants?<\/strong><\/p>\n

A geofence warrant is one of the kinds of warrants that people sometimes refer to as \u201creverse warrants.\u201d When you think about a traditional warrant, the police are supposed to have particularized suspicions\u2014they\u2019re supposed to be going to a neutral decision maker, like a judge or a magistrate, to show their reasons for suspecting that a certain person or a certain place has evidence of a crime that they\u2019re investigating.<\/p>\n

In the case of geofence warrants, [the police] don\u2019t have a particular person in mind, and they sort of work backwards from a location. They draw a line around that location and ask the company, in this case Google, for all the devices that can be found within that location at the relevant time. <\/p>\n

In this case, the police drew a line around the bank and asked Google for all of the devices that could be found within that space during the time the robbery occurred. That space didn\u2019t just involve the bank. There was a church in the immediate area, and there might have been people\u2019s homes or\u00a0other businesses.<\/p>\n

Have police increased their use of geofence warrants in recent years? How long has this search tactic been used?<\/strong><\/p>\n

This technique did not exist previously. It\u2019s only possible because of the way technology works now, and a big part of what the Court said in its opinion is that what was happening here is something that the founders could not have imagined when they were debating the Fourth Amendment\u2014a kind of surveillance and a kind of police investigation that would not have been possible. It was not previously possible for the police to retroactively tail all of us into private businesses and homes, throughout our days, at this level of granularity.<\/p>\n

The interesting thing about the Chatrie<\/em> case is that the particular three-step process that happened here, Google had already said that they are no longer doing it the same way. But that does not mean that there are not other ways for the police to access this type of information.<\/p>\n

Can you explain that three-step process ?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The more common thing is for police to just ask a company or a person for a specific thing in a specific location. Here, the warrant described this three-step process that, once the judge approved it, Google and the police would just go through [the data] on their own without returning to the magistrate.\u00a0<\/p>\n

First, Google would look in that physical location, the box the police had drawn, and return anonymized information about all the devices. The police would then look at what Google gave them and try to narrow down which of the devices they wanted more information about. In this case, the initial step returned 19 devices. And the police said, Okay, we want information about these nine<\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

And what\u2019s important to note is that in this case they were only looking for one suspect. So, at each of these steps, they\u2019re getting the data of people that are affirmatively not<\/em> the suspect. And it\u2019s important to recognize that these kinds of searches could draw in all of us, regardless of any suspicion or not.\u00a0<\/p>\n

So the police asked Google for more information about those nine accounts to look at where else those devices went before and after the crime. The identities of the people were still not being revealed to the police, but they could now see two hours of really granular location information about all the places those devices came from and went to during that period. Google captures location data once every two minutes, and it\u2019s pretty precise about where a person is. It also can capture elevation data\u2014if this person went to the doctor\u2019s office on the third floor, rather than the insurance salesman on the tenth floor.\u00a0<\/p>\n

From that return of nine sets of more granular information over two hours, the police then were supposed to look through that and identify the devices they wanted unmasked, to learn the identities of the people who owned those devices. And in this case, they didn\u2019t just ask for the person they eventually prosecuted, Mr. Chatrie. They asked Google to de-anonymize three accounts\u2014so, once again, people who affirmatively were not then the suspect.<\/p>

Read more Even FIFA and Trump Can\u2019t Ruin This World Cup<\/a><\/p>\n

What did the Supreme Court have to say about this process?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Six justices got in line behind the idea that the decision [from a lower court] should be vacated\u2014that a search did happen here according to the Fourth Amendment and needs to be more closely reviewed. Five justices signed on to the main opinion written by Justice [Elena] Kagan. And Justice Gorsuch wrote his own opinion that gets to the same place, but through a different avenue.<\/p>\n

Justice Kagan\u2019s opinion goes through the most recent, really seminal opinion on Fourth Amendment privacy in the digital era, which is Carpenter<\/em>. That\u2019s a case about cell site location information, which is pretty similar to the Google location history that was at issue here. And the majority opinion decides that, in accordance with Carpenter<\/em> in 2018, a search did occur here when the government went to Google and asked for all of this information, and so we need to look very closely at whether the warrant that the police got was appropriate. The opinion leaves for another day the questions that will ultimately resolve the case about whether the warrant itself was appropriate, but it decides that, for purposes of the Fourth Amendment, the government did conduct a search here. <\/p>\n

One thing that\u2019s really important about this decision is that it says a third-party doctrine does not apply in this case. The third-party doctrine is an exception to the Fourth Amendment that risks really swallowing the rule for all of us in today\u2019s digital economy. It\u2019s the idea that once you voluntarily share information with someone else, a third party [like Google], you lose all reasonable expectations of privacy in that information and the Fourth Amendment doesn\u2019t apply. And in this case, Justice Kagan\u2019s opinion really importantly says the third-party doctrine does not apply here\u2014just by using a cell phone the way cell phone users do, we don\u2019t give up our rights to our private information.<\/p>\n

What are the broader implications of the Court\u2019s ruling? Do you expect this case to have a ripple effect?<\/strong><\/p>\n

So if you read Justice [Samuel] Alito\u2019s dissent, he basically says this is coming for all digital surveillance\u2014which in our book is probably a good thing, but he says it as though it is a terrible thing. <\/p>\n

I think this is probably the most significant Supreme Court ruling on the Fourth Amendment since Carpenter<\/em>. What practical impact it will have remains to be seen, but I think it is an incredibly important development that the Supreme Court is not just extending the third-party doctrine to to all cases and saying that the introduction of a layer of corporate interaction in our lives removes all expectations of privacy. <\/p>\n

Because basically, in the last few decades, every single thing we do\u2014from communicating with our families to managing our finances to even thinking our own private thoughts\u2014corporations have sort of wormed their way into all of those processes and are mediating all of our human interactions, sometimes the most sensitive facets of our lives.<\/p>\n

And if the mere fact that a corporate tool was in the middle of all of that meant that we had no expectation of privacy whatsoever, that would be the exception that swallows the Fourth Amendment. I don\u2019t know whether this opinion will meaningfully change our day-to-day, but it is a step in the right direction to say that the Fourth Amendment really does still mean something. Privacy is still a value, and one that we\u2019re going to protect.<\/p>\n

It seems like people are increasingly aware of and concerned about surveillance, but thinking about things like First Amendment concerns<\/strong>, why does this decision matter for everyday people who haven\u2019t committed or aren\u2019t suspected of having committed any crimes?<\/strong><\/p>\n

All of these techniques\u2014from geofence reverse location searches to police use of facial recognition technology\u2014impact all of us. The companies and the police and the federal government don\u2019t necessarily distinguish when they vacuum up information\u2014when they buy information from data brokers, or when they use facial recognition on a crowd, they don\u2019t distinguish between folks that they have a particular interest in and folks that they don\u2019t. They are just vacuuming up information on everybody.<\/p>\n

We found in our research that the majority of American adults, as of 2021, were in Department of Homeland Security immigration databases and could be located by ICE and CBP. So, at a practical level, it impacts all of us, and it has really serious implications on our ability to live our lives and do the things that we want to do together. Because very quickly information about one of us becomes information about a whole group of us, and the police can use these kinds of techniques to surveil and track us from afar, without our knowledge, and identify when we go to protests or come together in community. <\/p>\n

So everybody should recognize that placing these limits on police and on government is vital to maintain any kind of any hope for communal action for community and for democracy.<\/p>

Read more Venezuela\u2019s Earthquake-Hit Health System Is in Crisis<\/a><\/p>\n<\/article>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Justices agreed 6-3 that police need a warrant to search your location data.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":892,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-894","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics"],"yoast_head":"\nSCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade - Moving and Mortgage Hub<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade - Moving and Mortgage Hub\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Justices agreed 6-3 that police need a warrant to search your location data.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Moving and Mortgage Hub\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-02T14:08:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/6e9b2cb7a2aef7b7808b87b7df99760e.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1124\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6b7c79bcfd888d98f34c5413df7e81a2\"},\"headline\":\"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-02T14:08:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894\"},\"wordCount\":1864,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp\",\"articleSection\":[\"Politics\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894\",\"name\":\"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade - Moving and Mortgage Hub\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-02T14:08:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6b7c79bcfd888d98f34c5413df7e81a2\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":630},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?p=894#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Moving and Mortgage Hub\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6b7c79bcfd888d98f34c5413df7e81a2\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/movingandmortgagehub.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade - Moving and Mortgage Hub","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade - Moving and Mortgage Hub","og_description":"Justices agreed 6-3 that police need a warrant to search your location data.","og_url":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894","og_site_name":"Moving and Mortgage Hub","article_published_time":"2026-07-02T14:08:58+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2000,"height":1124,"url":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/6e9b2cb7a2aef7b7808b87b7df99760e.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/#\/schema\/person\/6b7c79bcfd888d98f34c5413df7e81a2"},"headline":"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade","datePublished":"2026-07-02T14:08:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894"},"wordCount":1864,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp","articleSection":["Politics"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894","url":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894","name":"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade - Moving and Mortgage Hub","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp","datePublished":"2026-07-02T14:08:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/#\/schema\/person\/6b7c79bcfd888d98f34c5413df7e81a2"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d8a67079842ce2e0b84ab0df43a0fd12.webp","width":1200,"height":630},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?p=894#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SCOTUS Just Issued Its Biggest Privacy Ruling in Nearly a Decade"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/","name":"Moving and Mortgage Hub","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/#\/schema\/person\/6b7c79bcfd888d98f34c5413df7e81a2","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com"],"url":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/894","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=894"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/894\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/892"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=894"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=894"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/movingandmortgagehub.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=894"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}