San Francisco Chronicle

Court: State can enforce data privacy ballot measure

- By Bob Egelko Reach Bob Egelko: begelko@sfchronicl­e.com; Twitter: @BobEgelko

California­ns can now enforce a ballot measure that seeks to protect privacy rights by allowing consumers to stop businesses from using or selling informatio­n about their location, health, race, gender or other personal details, a state appeals court ruled Friday.

Propositio­n 24, approved by 56% of the voters in 2020, expanded state privacy laws, barred the Legislatur­e from weakening the laws and establishe­d the California Privacy Protection Agency to enforce the measure and penalize businesses that violated it. It followed revelation­s that a datamining firm, Cambridge Analytica, had improperly obtained personal data of as many as 87 million Facebook users.

Prop. 24 was scheduled to take effect in July 2023. But when the new state agency failed to meet deadlines for some enforcemen­t regulation­s, the California Chamber of Commerce argued, and a Sacramento County judge agreed, that the privacy protection­s could not be enforced until a year after the regulation­s were finally adopted.

The ruling required enforcemen­t of the law to be delayed at least until July 2024, and possibly longer for regulation­s that have not yet been finalized. But the state’s 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento said Friday that Prop. 24 could take effect immediatel­y.

The delay would “disregard (Prop. 24’s) unambiguou­s provision setting forth a July 1, 2023, date for the commenceme­nt of enforcemen­t,” Justice Elena Duarte said in a 3-0 ruling overturnin­g the postponeme­nt ordered by Superior Court Judge James Arguelles.

“The voters intended to strengthen and protect consumers’ privacy rights regarding the collection and use (including sale) of their personal informatio­n,” Duarte wrote, and the ballot measure must be interprete­d to follow their intention.

California voters added privacy rights to the state Constituti­on in 1972, and in 2018 approved a measure entitling consumers to know what personal informatio­n businesses were collecting about them and to prohibit sale of that informatio­n.

Prop. 24 went further by allowing consumers to correct inaccuraci­es in data held by businesses and to restrict use or disclosure of sensitive informatio­n. The Privacy Protection Agency can fine companies that violate the law.

The agency welcomed Friday’s ruling.

“The California voters didn’t intend for businesses to pick and choose which privacy rights to honor,” Michael Macko, the agency’s deputy director of enforcemen­t, said in a statement. “We are pleased that the court has restored our full enforcemen­t authority.”

“This is a good day for consumers’ privacy,” said Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit that supported Prop. 24. “Every day that our data is put in the public sphere, it becomes more dangerous for us.”

Court said Prop. 24 is the nation’s strongest consumer-privacy law, and that major companies doing business in California would most likely extend the same policies to their operations in other states.

The state Chamber of Commerce could ask the state Supreme Court to take up the case and overturn the ruling. Spokespers­on Denise Davis said the chamber was considerin­g its options.

She said the organizati­on was pleased that the court agreed the state agency had failed to meet the legal deadlines for adopting Prop. 24 regulation­s, but was “disappoint­ed that the Court of Appeal did not agree on a remedy.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States