Congress took a significant step today toward bringing our privacy laws in line with the reality of the digital age. The House overwhelmingly voted 419鈥�0 in support of the , a bill supported by the 老澳门开奖结果, which updates the outdated Electronic Communications Privacy Act by requiring law enforcement to obtain a warrant before accessing emails, texts, photos, or other electronic content. And now it鈥檚 time for the Senate to do its job and pass this critical reform.
ECPA was enacted in 1986, a time when many modern communications technologies, from web-based email to the cloud, were many years from being reality. Under the Justice Department鈥檚 interpretation of ECPA, law enforcement officers could access emails older than 180 days and any emails that had been opened without a warrant. The Email Privacy Act eliminates these arbitrary exceptions to the warrant requirement, and it would bring the law in line with what courts have already decided 鈥� that emails are protected by the Fourth Amendment.
While the Email Privacy Act is a huge step forward, the bill does have flaws. A critical privacy protection included in the original version of the bill, sponsored by 314 members of the House, required that individuals be notified if the government requested access to their electronic communications. This provision was removed by the House Judiciary Committee, making it difficult for someone to mount a legal challenge in cases of government abuse.
Other improvements can be made to the bill to bring it in line with strong electronic privacy bills already passed in states like California. Prohibiting illegally obtained electronic information from being used in a trial would further curb the potential for government abuse. Congress should also require that a probable cause warrant be required for location information, which in some cases can be accessed without a warrant, according to DOJ policy.
Reps. Kevin Yoder (R-Kan.), Jared Polis (R-Colo.), John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), and the House leadership deserve praise for crafting this strong, bi-partisan reform. The Senate should view the overwhelming bipartisan support of this bill in the House 鈥� and from many 鈥攁s a sign to move swiftly to bring U.S. privacy law into the 21st century.
With passage of this bill, Congress will be poised to help ensure that all Americans retain their Fourth Amendment rights in the digital realm.
Learn More 老澳门开奖结果 the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Privacy & Technology
老澳门开奖结果 Applauds Arizona Supreme Court Historic Decision That Police Need a Warrant to Access DNA老澳门开奖结果 Applauds Arizona Supreme Court Historic Decision That Police Need a Warrant to Access DNA
PHOENIX 鈥� In a 7-0 decision, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a warrant is required to extract and analyze people鈥檚 DNA, saying that a person鈥檚 limited consent to a search of biological material for a specific purpose鈥攊n this case, a blood alcohol test for a DUI arrest鈥攄oes not overcome that requirement. The 老澳门开奖结果 and the 老澳门开奖结果 of Arizona filed a friend-of-the-court brief in State v. Mitcham, arguing the government cannot genetically test biological material it already has in its possession鈥攚hether that鈥檚 blood taken from newborns to test for diseases or swabs collected from sexual assault survivors鈥攖o investigate the donors for a crime without first obtaining a warrant. In the decision, the court wrote that 鈥渋n reaching this conclusion, we emphatically reject the State鈥檚 position that it was free to analyze Mitcham鈥檚 blood in any way it pleased simply because the State lawfully possessed the blood vials.鈥� 鈥淕overnment analysis of our DNA can expose detailed information about our identity, appearance, family relationships, medical conditions, and more. We don鈥檛 consent to sharing all of that information each time we involuntarily shed our DNA or consent to a blood draw. The government鈥檚 argument in this case was a privacy nightmare,鈥� said Vera Eidelman, staff attorney with the 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. 鈥淲e are greatly heartened by the Arizona Supreme Court鈥檚 decision to preserve the privacy of our sensitive genetic information.鈥� In 2015, during a DUI arrest, the defendant in this case consented to the government collecting a sample of his blood solely to test it for blood-alcohol content, and was advised that the sample would be destroyed after 90 days. Instead, law enforcement held on to this sample for three years, at which point it used it for a completely different purpose鈥攖o extract and analyze his DNA, without a warrant or consent鈥攚hile investigating another crime. Had the court accepted the government鈥檚 rationale here, all of us who consent to a biological sample collection, at any point in time, for any purpose, to any government entity, could have been subject to a warrantless DNA search after the fact. 鈥淥ur DNA can reveal so much about us that our genetic privacy must be protected,鈥� said Jared Keenan, legal director of 老澳门开奖结果 of Arizona. 鈥淭he Court鈥檚 decision is vital to protecting the strong constitutional rights that keep all Arizonans鈥� information safe from warrantless searches and unconstitutional intrusion.鈥� -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Privacy & Technology
Face Recognition Threatens to Replace Tickets, ID at Sports Events 鈥� and BeyondFace Recognition Threatens to Replace Tickets, ID at Sports Events 鈥� and Beyond
You shouldn't participate in face recognition ticketing schemes. -
MississippiJul 2024
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
NetChoice v. FitchNetChoice v. Fitch
Whether a law that mandates age verification for all users of social media services violates the First Amendment. -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Privacy & Technology
AI Generated Police Reports Raise Concerns Around Transparency, BiasAI Generated Police Reports Raise Concerns Around Transparency, Bias
AI-generated police reports threaten to exacerbate existing problems in law enforcement, and to create new ones.