Bill Text: CA AB793 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session | Introduced
NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft
Bill Title: Privacy: reverse demands.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 8-0)
Status: (Engrossed) 2023-06-30 - In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author. [AB793 Detail]
Download: California-2023-AB793-Introduced.html
Bill Title: Privacy: reverse demands.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 8-0)
Status: (Engrossed) 2023-06-30 - In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author. [AB793 Detail]
Download: California-2023-AB793-Introduced.html
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—
2023–2024 REGULAR SESSION
Assembly Bill
No. 793
| Introduced by Assembly Member Bonta (Coauthors: Assembly Members Friedman and McKinnor) |
February 13, 2023 |
An act relating to privacy.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 793, as introduced, Bonta.
Privacy: reverse demands.
Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, provides that every individual possesses a fundamental right of privacy with respect to their personal reproductive decisions. Existing federal law, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), establishes provisions relating to the confidentiality of health records. Existing law, the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA), approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, grants a consumer various rights with respect to personal information, as defined, that is collected or sold by a business, as defined, including the right to require the business to delete personal information about the consumer, as specified, unless those obligations restrict a business’ ability to, among other things, comply with federal, state, or local laws or comply with a court order or
subpoena to provide information, or cooperate with a government agency request for emergency access to a consumer’s personal information if a natural person is at risk or danger of death or serious physical injury, as provided.
This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation related to protecting the privacy of those seeking reproductive and gender-affirming care.
Digest Key
Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: NO Local Program: NOBill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) California is proud to be a safe haven for reproductive rights, gender-affirming care, and digital privacy, and has long been at the forefront of protecting these fundamental rights.
(b) When it comes to protecting reproductive and LGBTQI rights and safety, our digital trail is highly revealing and must be safeguarded. With states across the country passing antiabortion and antitrans legislation, it is vital that California continue to protect against digital tracking of vulnerable people seeking health care.
(c) Reverse-location and reverse-keyword
demands can compel companies to search their records and reveal the identities of all people who looked up a particular keyword online or drove down a certain street.
(d) People in California have a fundamental, inalienable right of privacy under the California constitution with respect to personal reproductive decisions and digital privacy, but dragnet surveillance from reverse-location and reverse-keyword demands severely undermines the right to privacy, especially for people seeking abortions and gender-affirming care.
(e) Reverse demands can also chill the exercise of the freedom of speech, association, religion, assembly, movement, and the press.
(f) These mass surveillance demands have been used to track the locations and identities of people protesting police violence and could easily be used by local law
enforcement in states across the country to request the names and identities of people whose digital trail shows they have visited California abortion or gender-affirming care providers or even searched for revealing keywords online.
(g) General warrants are expansive and invasive searches by the government that fail to identify specific persons, devices, or places to be searched with evidence of probable cause. Since our nation’s founding, general warrants have been deemed a significant threat to personal freedom, privacy, and liberty. The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the use of general warrants.
(h) Reverse demands have the same practical effect as unconstitutional general warrants, and courts have found reverse-location demands unconstitutional.
(i) Legislation is necessary to preserve our right to safely seek reproductive and gender-affirming care in the digital age by protecting us from these invasive, harmful, and likely unconstitutional searches of our personal information.
