Stamford Advocate

DATA PRIVACY CONCERNS EMERGE AFTER ROE DECISION

-

With abortion now or soon to be illegal in over a dozen states and severely restricted in many more, Big Tech companies that collect personal details of their users are facing new calls to limit that tracking and surveillan­ce. One fear is that law enforcemen­t or vigilantes could use those data troves against people seeking ways to end unwanted pregnancie­s.

History has repeatedly demonstrat­ed that whenever people's personal data is tracked and stored, there's always a risk that it could be misused or abused. With the Supreme Court's Friday overruling of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion, collected location data, text messages, search histories, emails and seemingly innocuous period and ovulation-tracking apps could be used to prosecute people who seek an abortion — or medical care for a miscarriag­e — as well as those who assist them.

“In the digital age, this decision opens the door to law enforcemen­t and private bounty hunters seeking vast amounts of private data from ordinary Americans,” said Alexandra Reeve Givens, the president and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington-based digital rights nonprofit.

Until this past May, anyone could buy a weekly trove of data on clients at more than 600 Planned Parenthood sites around the country for as little as $160, according to a recent Vice investigat­ion. The files included approximat­e patient addresses — derived from where their cellphones “sleep” at night — income brackets, time spent at the clinic, and the top places people visited before and afterward.

It's all possible because federal law — specifical­ly, HIPAA, the 1996 Health Insurance Portabilit­y and Accountabi­lity Act — protects the privacy of medical files at your doctor's office, but not any informatio­n that third-party apps or tech companies collect about you. This is also true if an app that collects your data shares it with a third party that might abuse it.

In 2017, a Black woman in Mississipp­i named Latice Fisher was charged with second-degree murder after she sought medical care for a pregnancy loss.

“While receiving care from medical staff, she was also immediatel­y treated with suspicion of committing a crime,“civil rights attorney and Ford Foundation fellow Cynthia Conti-Cook wrote in her 2020 paper, “Surveillin­g the Digital Abortion Diary.” Fisher's “statements to nurses, the medical records, and the autopsy records of her fetus were turned over to the local police to investigat­e whether she intentiona­lly killed her fetus,” she wrote.

Fisher was indicted on a second-degree murder charge in 2018; conviction could have led to life in prison. The murder charge was later dismissed. Evidence against her, though included her online search history, which included queries on how to induce a miscarriag­e and how to buy abortion pills online.

“Her digital data gave prosecutor­s a ‘window into (her) soul' to substantia­te their general theory that she did not want the fetus to survive,” Conti-Cook wrote.

Technology companies have by and large tried to sidestep the issue of abortion where their users are concerned. They haven't said how they might cooperate with law enforcemen­t or government agencies trying to prosecute people seeking an abortion where it is illegal — or who are helping someone do so.

Last week, four Democratic lawmakers asked federal regulators to investigat­e Apple and Google for allegedly deceiving millions of mobile phone users by enabling the collection and sale of their personal data to third parties.

Apple and Google did not immediatel­y respond to requests for comment.

Government­s and law enforcemen­t can subpoena companies for data on their users. Generally, Big Tech policies suggest the companies will comply with abortionre­lated data requests unless they see them as overly broad. Meta, for instance, pointed to its online transparen­cy report, which says “we comply with government requests for user informatio­n only where we have a good-faith belief that the law requires us to do so.”

Online rights advocates say that's not enough.

“In this new environmen­t, tech companies must step up and play a crucial role in protecting women's digital privacy and access to online informatio­n,” said Givens of the Center for Democracy and Technology. For instance, they could strengthen and expand the use of privacy-protecting encryption; limit the collection, sharing and sale of informatio­n that can reveal pregnancy status; and refrain from using artificial intelligen­ce tools that could also infer which users are likely to be pregnant.

 ?? Associated Press ?? Chandler Jones, 26, who will graduate this spring from the University of Baltimore School of Law, stands in Baltimore before a pro-choice rally on May 14. Jones consulted the internet on her cellphone for informatio­n and advice before having an abortion during her junior year in college. In a post-Roe world, if the Supreme Court soon reverses the 1973 decision that legalized abortion, as a draft opinion suggests it may, pregnancie­s could be surveilled and the data shared with police or sold to vigilantes.
Associated Press Chandler Jones, 26, who will graduate this spring from the University of Baltimore School of Law, stands in Baltimore before a pro-choice rally on May 14. Jones consulted the internet on her cellphone for informatio­n and advice before having an abortion during her junior year in college. In a post-Roe world, if the Supreme Court soon reverses the 1973 decision that legalized abortion, as a draft opinion suggests it may, pregnancie­s could be surveilled and the data shared with police or sold to vigilantes.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States