SENSITIVE MATERIAL. THIS IMAGE MAY BE OFFENDED OR MEETING Abortion protesters are participating in national demonstrations following the expiration of the Supreme Court’s ruling, which suggests the possibility of overturning Rowe v. Wade’s decision on abortion rights, in New York, USA, May 14, 2022.
Caitlin Oaks Reuters
The Supreme Court’s decision Friday to repeal the right to abortion raises new questions about whether and how technology companies should protect the information of consumers seeking reproductive health care.
Technology companies may have to deal with consumer privacy issues related to such healthcare, whether they want to or not. This can happen if the court orders them to transmit certain types of data, such as information about the location of users in an abortion clinic, search history or text messages.
Even before the decision became formal, lawmakers called on Google and the Federal Trade Commission to ensure that data on online caregivers would be protected in the event that the remarkable Roe v. Wade ruling is overturned. The letters came after a Politico report on an expired draft decision that would reduce protections.
The official solution puts online platforms in a complex place. Although large technology companies have spoken out on policy issues that fit their values, including advocating for certain types of privacy laws and immigration reforms that would protect their workforce, getting into such a contentious issue as abortion rights can lead to a significant reaction from both sides of the debate.
Proponents of people seeking abortion or those persecuted after losing a pregnancy say they have already tackled privacy concerns in countries with restrictive abortion laws.
“We’ve seen it before, but we expect technology companies to be issued subpoenas for search history and search information,” said Dana Sussman, deputy executive director of the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, a nonprofit organization that provides legal protection of pregnant people.
“The problem is that if you build it, they will come,” said Corinne McSherry, legal director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). “If you’re creating huge databases of information, what you’re creating is also something like a copper court for law enforcement to come to you, you’re a third party, and try to get that information if they think it’s useful for the judiciary. persecution.
That’s why a group of Democrats, led by Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Representative Anna Yeshua of California, wrote to Google last month about concerns that her “current practice of collecting and storing extensive records of cell phone location data will allow him to become a tool for far-right extremists who want to deal with people seeking reproductive health. That’s because Google stores historical location information for hundreds of millions of smartphone users, which it regularly shares with government agencies. “
Data privacy experts concerned about the implications of the ruling say there are ways in which both technology companies and their users can try to better protect their information in the post-Roe era.
Risk of digital technologies in the world after Rowe
Susman cited two cases that could portend ways in which prosecutors in the post-Rowe era would seek to use digital communications as evidence in cases criminalizing abortion.
Thousands protest abortion in Washington, DC, January 21, 2022
Yasin Ozturk | Anatolian Agency Getty Images
The first is that of Purvi Patel, who was sentenced in 2015 to 20 years in prison after being charged with murder and neglect of a child after allegedly causing her own abortion. Patel told doctors at the Indiana Emergency Department that she had a miscarriage that resulted in a stillbirth. The indictment uses texts between Patel and a friend that include a discussion about ordering pills at the pharmacy intended to induce an abortion as evidence against her.
In 2016, the appellate court reduced the gravity of the charges by finding that the law was not intended to be used against women for their own abortions, and Patel was released from prison when her sentence was also reduced.
The second case is that of Latis Fisher, who in 2018 was indicted by the Mississippi Grand Jury on a second-degree murder charge after giving birth, according to her lawyers, to a stillborn baby. Prosecutors used Fisher’s search history, which included searching for abortion pills and inducing a miscarriage, according to reports at the time, as evidence against her. The district prosecutor later dropped the charge.
Once the defenses offered by Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, another case that generally upholds abortion rights, are repealed, “we will see existing laws reinterpreted to expand to apply to conduct during pregnancy,” including loss of pregnancy and self-managed abortion, Sussman said.
Although many advocates for abortion laws say they should focus on providers of procedures, Sussman predicts that prosecutors will inevitably follow those seeking services.
“I don’t think that’s just realistic,” Sussman said of the idea that anti-abortion laws would not target pregnant women. “And I don’t think it’s true at all, both because we’ve already seen it and because when you make laws that state that the fetus is a person, you’re going to criminalize a pregnant woman. There’s just no doubt about it. “
How technology platforms can protect reproductive health data
For technology platforms, EFF suggested in a recent blog post that minimizing data collection and storage could best reduce the risk of this data being investigated. The group suggests that companies reduce behavioral tracking, reduce the types of data they collect to just what is needed, and encrypt the default data so that it is not easy to read by others.
The EFF also calls on companies to reject what they think would be an incorrect requirement, such as asking search engines for search terms such as ‘abortion’ or geozone guarantees that order data for each device in an area, such as a clinic. for abortion. If they are still required to comply, companies should at least inform consumers about them, if they are not prohibited from doing so, the group said.
“I think the companies are a little silent, but I’m pretty sure they’re thinking about it,” McSherry said.
“Technology platforms play a key role here,” said Sussman, who said companies must use their vast resources to challenge court orders for information related to abortion or loss of pregnancy.
“The reality is that prosecutors have a certain amount of resources,” Sussman said. “And if they think the best way to use their resources to improve the quality of life in their community is to fight for the digital footprint of pregnant people, then they will have to spend those resources and they don’t have unlimited resources. So if technology companies can make it much, much, much harder for them to access this information, it will play a huge role in stopping their ability to sue. “
The Meta Platforms logo is visible in Davos, Switzerland, May 22, 2022.
Arnd Wigman Reuters
A spokesman for Meta’s Facebook mother said the company was already rejecting overly broad requests for information, citing a policy on government requests that said it “may reject or require more specific requests that seem too broad or vague.” The policy also states that Meta will inform users and advertisers when they receive such requests, unless they are prohibited from doing so.
While many technology companies may tend to be as politically neutral as possible, McSherry said, “Companies should always protect their customers with confidentiality, no matter what the problem.” And it’s an opportunity for them to do that. “
McSherry expects that if technology companies do not take steps to protect the information of consumers seeking abortion, their employees are likely to encourage them to do more, just as they do on other issues.
How users can protect their own data
While companies minimize the collection and retention of their own data is the clearest way to reduce the risk of disclosure, experts focused on surveillance and digital rights say there are some ways consumers can reduce it themselves. risk.
McSherry said it was important to remember that “confidentiality is a community activity.” This means that consumers need to think not only about the privacy and security of their own devices and services, but also about those of their friends, family, and providers with whom they interact.
This is because even under some existing state laws, such as those in Texas, prosecutors may seek information orders from third parties that they believe may have helped a pregnant woman have an abortion.
“Again, the responsibility to protect ourselves from unfair criminalization lies with the people who have the least resources,” Sussman said. “I would also warn people to ensure that they do not share information with many people, which is again incredibly difficult if you need the support of your family, friends and community. But people need to be very careful about who they share information with, because not only will the digital footprint be questioned, but people who have information can also be involved here in one way or another. “
The EFF does not endorse specific products, but McSherry has suggested several key ways for consumers to increase the privacy protection of their data.
The first is to use a search engine or browser that minimizes the collection or storage of default data, such as DuckDuckGo, Firefox, or Brave, and use a private browsing window that will not save the search history.
Second, users should only report sensitive information through encrypted messaging services, such as Signal.
EFF also offers in a blog post to protect sensitive information …
Add Comment