Minnesota GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026)

Minnesota does something almost no other state does. Instead of banning GPS tracking only in certain situations, Minnesota Statutes section 626A.35 opens with a blanket rule: no person may install or use a mobile tracking device without first obtaining a court order.

Read literally, that rule binds everyone, not just the police. What makes the statute workable in everyday life is a short list of exceptions, and the most important one is consent of the vehicle's owner. The exceptions do the practical work, but the baseline is a ban.

This guide explains how Minnesota's court-order rule actually operates, when tracking a person becomes criminal harassment or stalking under section 609.749, what employers can and cannot do, and what to do if you find a tracker on your car. It is part of our GPS Tracking Laws by State series.

Is It Legal to Put a GPS Tracker on a Car in Minnesota?

Only if an exception in section 626A.35 covers you. The two that matter for ordinary people are simple: you can track a vehicle you own or co-own, and a business can track vehicles it owns and provides to employees.

If the car belongs to someone else and you do not have the owner's consent, installing or using a tracker is a crime. There is no exception for spouses tracking a car titled only to the other spouse, no exception for exes, and no exception for suspicious partners who slip an AirTag into a door pocket.

That puts Minnesota among the stricter states. Many states criminalize tracking only when it is done to harass or with intent to injure. Minnesota's statute does not ask why you did it. If you knowingly installed or used the device without a court order and without a qualifying exception, the elements are met.

The criminal exposure does not stop there. If the tracking is part of a pattern directed at a person, harassment and stalking charges under section 609.749 can stack on top, and those climb to felony level quickly.

Minnesota's Court-Order Rule (626A.35) and Its Consent Exceptions

Section 626A.35 sits inside Minnesota's electronic surveillance chapter, and its structure is unusual. Subdivision 1 states the general rule: except as otherwise provided, no person may install or use a mobile tracking device without a court order issued under the chapter's procedures.

The statute was written with law enforcement in mind. It sets out how officers apply for tracking orders and what judges must find. But the prohibition itself is worded to reach any person, which is why private tracking falls under it too.

The exceptions then carve out the lawful cases:

• Owner consent. The ban does not apply when the owner of the vehicle or object consents. A registered owner or co-owner can track their own car.
• Employer vehicles. Because the business owns the vehicle, the owner-consent exception lets it use tracking devices on its own fleet, including company cars assigned to employees.
• Law enforcement with a court order. Officers can track once a judge signs an order supported by the required showing.
• Stolen vehicles. Police can activate or use a tracking device in a reported stolen vehicle, with the owner's consent or a stolen vehicle report. A 2023 amendment created this exception with a 24-hour deadline, and a 2025 amendment tightened it to 12 hours: officers must obtain a warrant, disable the device, or remove it within that window.
• Fleeing vehicles. A 2025 amendment lets officers deploy a tracking device on a fleeing motor vehicle, subject to the same 12-hour warrant-or-remove requirement.
• Communication service providers, but only for pen registers and trap-and-trace devices. Subdivision 2's provider exception covers a pen register or trap-and-trace device, the devices that record dialed or incoming numbers, in the ordinary course of furnishing service. It does not extend to mobile tracking devices. Minnesota's mobile-tracking-device exceptions (subdivisions 2a through 2c) cover owner consent, stolen vehicles, and fleeing vehicles, and contain no general provider carve-out.

Notice what is missing. There is no exception for parents tracking an adult child's car, for private investigators, or for anyone tracking a vehicle they do not own without the owner's consent.

When Tracking Becomes Harassment or Stalking (609.749)

Minnesota's harassment statute, section 609.749, reaches GPS tracking directly. Subdivision 2, captioned Harassment crimes, lists following, monitoring, or pursuing another person, whether in person or through any available technological or other means, among the acts it covers. Monitoring alone is not the whole offense. The act must be committed with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate, and it must also place the victim in reasonable fear of substantial bodily harm, place them in reasonable fear that a family or household member will be subject to substantial bodily harm, or cause or reasonably be expected to cause substantial emotional distress. Only then is it a gross misdemeanor.

A hidden tracker is a textbook example of monitoring through technological means. Prosecutors do not need to prove physical following. The phone screen showing the victim's location in real time is the monitoring. What they still have to prove is the intent and the required effect on the victim, so covert tracking by itself does not automatically make out a subdivision 2 count.

The charge escalates to a felony when aggravating factors apply. Under subdivision 3, harassment becomes a felony punishable by up to five years in prison when, for example, the victim is under 18 and the offender is more than 36 months older, the offender used a dangerous weapon, or the offense was committed by falsely impersonating another. A repeat violation within ten years of a qualified domestic violence-related conviction, which includes restraining order violations, is also a felony under subdivision 4. Subdivision 5, retitled Stalking when the legislature recodified the statute in 2020, carries up to ten years. It requires two or more qualifying acts within a five-year period that the actor knows or has reason to know would cause the victim to feel terrorized or to fear bodily harm, and that do cause that reaction.

Federal law adds another layer. The federal stalking statute, 18 U.S.C. 2261A, covers using an electronic device to surveil someone in ways that cause fear or substantial emotional distress, including across state lines.

Who CAN Legally Track a Vehicle in Minnesota

Putting the statute's exceptions in plain terms, tracking is lawful in Minnesota when:

• You own or co-own the vehicle. Tracking your own car, including one your teen driver uses, is permitted because the owner consents.
• The vehicle owner gives consent. A friend or family member who owns the car can agree to a tracker.
• You are a business tracking your own fleet, including company vehicles assigned to employees.
• You are law enforcement acting under a court order, or within the stolen-vehicle or fleeing-vehicle exceptions and their 12-hour limits.
• You are a communication service provider using a pen register or trap-and-trace device in the ordinary course of service. That exception does not cover mobile tracking devices, which have their own separate, narrower exceptions.

Two cautions. First, owner consent attaches to the vehicle, not the person. Owning the car your spouse drives lets you track the car, but using that data to harass or intimidate can still trigger section 609.749. Second, family court judges take covert tracking seriously, and evidence gathered this way often backfires in divorce and custody cases.

Can My Employer Track My Car in Minnesota?

Minnesota has no statute regulating employer GPS tracking as such, but section 626A.35 draws the practical line at ownership.

Company-owned vehicles are squarely within the owner-consent exception, since the business that owns the vehicle can consent to the device. If you drive a company truck or a fleet car, your employer can lawfully track it, and many do for routing, mileage, and theft recovery.

Your personal vehicle is different. The owner-consent exception covers vehicles the business owns. An employer who installs a tracker on an employee's personal car without the employee's consent has no exception to stand on, which means the conduct falls back under the general ban. The careful approach, and the standard one, is written consent that spells out when tracking occurs.

Employees who suspect off-hours tracking of a personal vehicle should document what they find and consider both the criminal statute and the civil claims discussed below. For workplace camera and monitoring rules more broadly, see our guide to surveillance camera laws.

AirTags and Item Trackers

Minnesota's statute is not limited to hardwired GPS units. Section 626A.35 covers mobile tracking devices generally, defined in section 626A.39 as devices that permit tracking of the movement of a person or object. An AirTag, Tile, SmartTag, or GPS logger dropped into a bag or magnet-mounted under a bumper fits.

So the same analysis applies. Slipping an AirTag into someone's car or purse without the owner's consent is a knowing installation or use of a tracking device without a court order. If it is done to monitor a person, it is also evidence of harassment under section 609.749.

Apple, Google, and Samsung all push unknown-tracker alerts to nearby phones. If your iPhone or Android device warns that an unknown tracker is traveling with you, treat the alert seriously and follow the steps in the what-to-do section below.

Penalties for Illegal GPS Tracking in Minnesota

Charges often stack. A person who plants a tracker and uses it to follow an ex can face the device count under 626A.35 and a harassment count under 609.749 from the same course of conduct.

Civil Options and Harassment Restraining Orders

Criminal charges are not the only remedy, and for many victims they are not the fastest one.

Harassment restraining orders. Section 609.748 lets a victim petition district court for an HRO against anyone whose harassing conduct, including unwanted tracking, has or is intended to have a substantial adverse effect on their safety, security, or privacy. Courts can issue an ex parte temporary order quickly, and violating an HRO is itself a crime, and a prior conviction for one can elevate later harassment to a felony under 609.749, subdivision 4. Our Minnesota restraining order guide walks through the process.

Invasion of privacy lawsuit. In Lake v. Wal-Mart Stores (1998), the Minnesota Supreme Court recognized the privacy torts, including intrusion upon seclusion. Secretly monitoring someone's movements is the kind of intentional intrusion on private affairs, offensive to a reasonable person, that the tort targets. Damages can cover emotional distress, and egregious conduct can support punitive damages.

If audio recording is also involved, for example a device that captures conversations in the car, Minnesota's one-party consent wiretap rules come into play. See our Minnesota recording laws guide for that side of the law.

What to Do If You Find a Tracker on Your Car

1. Do not destroy it. The device is evidence, and it may carry fingerprints or a registered owner trail police can follow.
2. Photograph it in place. Capture where it was mounted, the wiring or magnet, and any serial numbers before anyone moves it.
3. Call local police or the sheriff. Report it as suspected unlawful tracking under section 626A.35 and possible harassment under 609.749. Ask for a case number.
4. Think before you drive. If you are in an abusive situation, a removed tracker tells the person watching that you found it. A domestic violence advocate can help you time removal safely. The Minnesota Day One hotline connects victims to local resources.
5. Check your devices too. Run unknown-tracker scans on your phone, and review phone accounts and shared logins, since stalkers often combine a car tracker with phone-based location sharing.
6. Consider an HRO. If you know or suspect who placed it, a harassment restraining order under 609.748 creates fast, enforceable distance.

For United States v. Jones (2012) reasons, even the police need a warrant for this. The Supreme Court held that attaching a GPS device to a car and monitoring its movements is a Fourth Amendment search. A private citizen has no greater power, and in Minnesota the statute says so explicitly.

Sources

1. Minnesota Statutes 626A.35, Mobile Tracking Devices
2. Minnesota Statutes 626A.39, Definitions
3. Minnesota Statutes 609.749, Harassment and Stalking
4. Minnesota Statutes 609.748, Harassment Restraining Orders
5. United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012)
6. 18 U.S.C. 2261A, Federal Stalking Statute

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Laws change, and how they apply depends on your specific situation. If you are dealing with unwanted tracking or stalking, contact local law enforcement and consult a licensed Minnesota attorney.

More Minnesota Laws

• Minnesota Dashcam Laws
• Minnesota Data Privacy Laws
• Minnesota Drone Laws
• Minnesota Employee Monitoring Laws
• Minnesota Recording Laws
• Minnesota Restraining Order Laws