The coronavirus has reignited the post-9/11 debate about security and civil liberties. The U.S. response to that tragedy has lessons for how to manage the trade-offs this time around.
Under the law, the onus is on consumers to request that companies disclose or delete their personal data. But more states and the federal government could still jump into the privacy debate.
A lot of state legislators sought to follow California in imposing new regulations on consumer data privacy. In most states, they didn't make it that far.
Several states have run pilots for digital driver’s licenses, which would allow residents to supplement plastic ID cards with smartphone apps. But as the technology becomes more of a reality, experts are worried about the privacy implications.
U.S. Sen. Ed Markey’s, D-Mass., sweeping privacy framework would limit the amount of data companies collect on users and require more transparency about how it’s being used.
COMMENTARY | The president of the Consumer Technology Association says California's privacy law—along with proposed legislation in Washington state and Massachusetts—will create a tangle of rules that "stifle competition and choke small businesses."
Representatives of the technology industry, and some state officials, say having broad privacy laws in each state could curb innovation. But other states leaders argue intervention is necessary to protect consumers.
COMMENTARY | Facial recognition technology is new and nascent, but not a departure from the innate abilities humans are born with. Efforts by states to limit its use harms public safety and deters innovation.
STATE AND LOCAL ROUNDUP | $200 million in seized personal property in Arizona … Pittsburgh’s steepest street declaration … and explore Charlotte’s expanded airport concourse.