Several Supreme Court justices voiced concern Wednesday during oral argument in Carpenter v. U.S. (see 1711280046) about how to ensure privacy protections in an era of advanced surveillance technologies. Justices seemed divided on what boundaries to set for government searches of cellphone location information. The case challenges the legality of the government’s search of convicted criminal Timothy Carpenter’s cellphone location information in several robberies. Representing Carpenter, American Civil Liberties Union attorney Nathan Freed Wessler said “warrantless collection” of 127 days of Carpenter’s information was illegal. Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben said court precedent supports the government.

House Communications and Digital Commerce subcommittees members interspersed expected questions and concerns Wednesday about the tech sector's data privacy policies (see 1711280059) with a debate on the extent to which the sector's activities represented another front in the battle over net neutrality rules. The joint hearing came amid rancor on and off Capitol Hill over the FCC's draft order to rescind 2015 net neutrality rules and expectations the commission will need to defend the decision in court (see 1711290032, 1711210020, 1711210041, 1711270042 and 1711270054). Lawmakers' concerns about data practices included the Equifax and Uber data breaches and content filtering.

House Communications and Digital Commerce subcommittees members interspersed expected questions and concerns Wednesday about the tech sector's data privacy policies (see 1711280059) with a debate on the extent to which the sector's activities represented another front in the battle over net neutrality rules. The joint hearing came amid rancor on and off Capitol Hill over the FCC's draft order to rescind 2015 net neutrality rules and expectations the commission will need to defend the decision in court (see 1711290032, 1711210020, 1711210041, 1711270042 and 1711270054). Lawmakers' concerns about data practices included the Equifax and Uber data breaches and content filtering.

Several Supreme Court justices voiced concern Wednesday during oral argument in Carpenter v. U.S. (see 1711280046) about how to ensure privacy protections in an era of advanced surveillance technologies. Justices seemed divided on what boundaries to set for government searches of cellphone location information. The case challenges the legality of the government’s search of convicted criminal Timothy Carpenter’s cellphone location information in several robberies. Representing Carpenter, American Civil Liberties Union attorney Nathan Freed Wessler said “warrantless collection” of 127 days of Carpenter’s information was illegal. Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben said court precedent supports the government.

House Communications and Digital Commerce subcommittees are expected to delve further into their concerns about tech companies' data privacy policies during a Wednesday hearing, we are told. The hearing, on how use of algorithms affects consumer privacy and choice with online content, follows scrutiny elsewhere on Capitol Hill last month about tech firms' handling of online advertising in Russian-led disinformation campaigns during the 2016 U.S. presidential election (see 1711210025, 1711020001 and 1711210025). The hearing will begin at 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn.

The Supreme Court takes up a landmark digital privacy case Wednesday with implications for protections for cloud-based data, lawyers told us. Privacy advocates told us hope the court will rule warrants must be obtained for government to access cellphone location information. Law enforcement access is at the heart of Carpenter v. U.S. challenging whether the government’s search of convicted criminal Timothy Carpenter's cellphone records, relying on a law predating modern digital capabilities, was a Fourth Amendment violation (see 1706050006).

House Communications and Digital Commerce subcommittees are expected to delve further into their concerns about tech companies' data privacy policies during a Wednesday hearing, we are told. The hearing, on how use of algorithms affects consumer privacy and choice with online content, follows scrutiny elsewhere on Capitol Hill last month about tech firms' handling of online advertising in Russian-led disinformation campaigns during the 2016 U.S. presidential election (see 1711210025, 1711020001 and 1711210025). The hearing will begin at 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn.

House Communications and Digital Commerce subcommittees are expected to delve further into their concerns about tech companies' data privacy policies during a Wednesday hearing, we are told. The hearing, on how use of algorithms affects consumer privacy and choice with online content, follows scrutiny elsewhere on Capitol Hill last month about tech firms' handling of online advertising in Russian-led disinformation campaigns during the 2016 U.S. presidential election (see 1711210025, 1711020001 and 1711210025). The hearing will begin at 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn.

The Supreme Court takes up a landmark digital privacy case Wednesday with implications for protections for cloud-based data, lawyers told us. Privacy advocates told us hope the court will rule warrants must be obtained for government to access cellphone location information. Law enforcement access is at the heart of Carpenter v. U.S. challenging whether the government’s search of convicted criminal Timothy Carpenter's cellphone records, relying on a law predating modern digital capabilities, was a Fourth Amendment violation (see 1706050006).

The Supreme Court takes up a landmark digital privacy case Wednesday with implications for protections for cloud-based data, lawyers told us. Privacy advocates told us hope the court will rule warrants must be obtained for government to access cellphone location information. Law enforcement access is at the heart of Carpenter v. U.S. challenging whether the government’s search of convicted criminal Timothy Carpenter's cellphone records, relying on a law predating modern digital capabilities, was a Fourth Amendment violation (see 1706050006).