ARTICLE
18 November 2020

Voters Choose Privacy At The Ballot Box

KM
Knobbe Martens

Contributor

Knobbe Martens
While most 2020 media election coverage focused on the races for President and control of Congress, privacy also had its day at the ballot box.
United States Privacy
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

While most 2020 media election coverage focused on the races for President and control of Congress, privacy also had its day at the ballot box.

This blog has previously described  California Proposition 24, also known as the California Privacy Rights Act ("CPRA").  Over nine million  Californians approved the CPRA, which amounts to just over 56% of the up-or-down vote.

Simultaneously, other jurisdictions held referendums on the collection and use of personal information by the government.

The citizens of Michigan approved " Proposal 2, Search Warrant for Electronic Data Amendment."  This ballot proposition amends  Article I, § 11 of the Michigan Constitution to guarantee that individuals' electronic data must be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.  The practical effect of the constitutional change is that Michigan law enforcement may not obtain electronic data and communications of individuals without a warrant.  Proposal 2 received unanimous support in the Michigan legislature, was supported by  both the Michigan State Police and the American Civil Liberties Union, and had no known opposition.  The strong level of support was reflected by the electorate, as over 88% of the statewide votes were in favor of Proposal 2.

Meanwhile, the city of Portland, Maine became the latest U.S. city to  ban the use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement, following similar bans in places such as San Francisco, Boston, and Portland, Oregon.  States such as Washington have begun to grapple with determining the boundaries of the government's permissible use of facial recognition technology.  In contrast, Portland, Maine voters were decisive in approving a blanket ban on the use of the technology, with statutory awards of $1,000 or more available to individuals who are surveilled by law enforcement using such technology.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More