Privacy & Technology
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI鈥檚 secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs 鈥� Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim 鈥� insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking 鈥渟tate secrets.鈥� The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the 吃瓜直播 of Southern California, the 吃瓜直播, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View Case
Learn 吃瓜直播 Privacy & Technology
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2018
Privacy & Technology
Carpenter v. United States
The Supreme Court ruled that the government needs a warrant to access a person鈥檚 cellphone location history. The court found in a 5 to 4 decision that obtaining such information is a search under the Fourth Amendment and that a warrant from a judge based on probable cause is required.
Court Case
Dec 2016
Privacy & Technology
Sarkar v. Doe - PubPeer Subpoena Challenge
The 吃瓜直播 filed a motion in Michigan state court challenging the constitutionality of a subpoena issued to the website PubPeer demanding that it turn over the identities of anonymous commenters. In March 2015, the trial judge ruled that PubPeer had to unmask one 鈥� but only one 鈥� of the commenters. Both PubPeer and the researcher appealed, and the ruling was upheld in December 2016.
All Cases
73 Privacy & Technology Cases
Court Case
May 2019
Privacy & Technology
+2 Issues
Sandvig v. Barr 鈥� Challenge to CFAA Prohibition on Uncovering Racial Discrimination Online
The 吃瓜直播 has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which makes it a federal crime to access a computer in a manner that 鈥渆xceeds authorized access.鈥� This provision of the law often prohibits and chills academics, researchers, and journalists from testing for discrimination on the internet. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in June 2016. The plaintiffs are academic researchers, computer scientists, and journalists who wish to investigate companies鈥� online practices through standard academic and journalistic techniques, but are limited by the terms of service of target websites.
Explore case
Court Case
May 2019
Privacy & Technology
+2 Issues
Sandvig v. Barr 鈥� Challenge to CFAA Prohibition on Uncovering Racial Discrimination Online
The 吃瓜直播 has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which makes it a federal crime to access a computer in a manner that 鈥渆xceeds authorized access.鈥� This provision of the law often prohibits and chills academics, researchers, and journalists from testing for discrimination on the internet. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in June 2016. The plaintiffs are academic researchers, computer scientists, and journalists who wish to investigate companies鈥� online practices through standard academic and journalistic techniques, but are limited by the terms of service of target websites.
Court Case
Dec 2018
Privacy & Technology
National Security
Executive Order 12,333 鈥� FOIA Lawsuit
The 吃瓜直播 and the Media Freedom Information Access ("MFIA") Clinic at Yale Law School have filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit demanding that the government release information about its use of Executive Order 12,333 to conduct surveillance of Americans' international communications.
Explore case
Court Case
Dec 2018
Privacy & Technology
National Security
Executive Order 12,333 鈥� FOIA Lawsuit
The 吃瓜直播 and the Media Freedom Information Access ("MFIA") Clinic at Yale Law School have filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit demanding that the government release information about its use of Executive Order 12,333 to conduct surveillance of Americans' international communications.
Court Case
Dec 2017
Privacy & Technology
NIT Warrant Unsealing Motion
Explore case
Court Case
Dec 2017
Privacy & Technology
NIT Warrant Unsealing Motion
Court Case
Jul 2017
Privacy & Technology
Liberian Community Association v. Malloy
During the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak, state officials quarantined multiple people who had arrived in the United States from Liberia, without adequate scientific justification, thereby violating their constitutional rights.
Explore case
Court Case
Jul 2017
Privacy & Technology
Liberian Community Association v. Malloy
During the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak, state officials quarantined multiple people who had arrived in the United States from Liberia, without adequate scientific justification, thereby violating their constitutional rights.
Court Case
Jun 2017
Privacy & Technology
Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program v. Drug Enforcement Administration
The 吃瓜直播 and its Oregon affiliate are challenging the federal Drug Enforcement Administration's claim that it can access Oregonians' private prescription records without a warrant. The 吃瓜直播 and the 吃瓜直播 of Oregon represent a group of Oregon patients and a physician who are concerned about the impact on medical privacy and the doctor-patient relationship if federal law enforcement were permitted to access prescription records without demonstrating probable cause to a neutral judge. A district court judge ruled in February 2014 that patients have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their prescription records and that law enforcement must obtain a warrant in order to search such information. In June 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court鈥檚 ruling on procedural grounds but recognized that medical records are private and sensitive and require strong legal safeguards, leaving the door open to future challenges.
Explore case
Court Case
Jun 2017
Privacy & Technology
Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program v. Drug Enforcement Administration
The 吃瓜直播 and its Oregon affiliate are challenging the federal Drug Enforcement Administration's claim that it can access Oregonians' private prescription records without a warrant. The 吃瓜直播 and the 吃瓜直播 of Oregon represent a group of Oregon patients and a physician who are concerned about the impact on medical privacy and the doctor-patient relationship if federal law enforcement were permitted to access prescription records without demonstrating probable cause to a neutral judge. A district court judge ruled in February 2014 that patients have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their prescription records and that law enforcement must obtain a warrant in order to search such information. In June 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court鈥檚 ruling on procedural grounds but recognized that medical records are private and sensitive and require strong legal safeguards, leaving the door open to future challenges.