Press Releases
about Privacy & Technology
Mar 29, 2024
桃子视频and 桃子视频of Florida Sound Alarm on Lakeland鈥檚 New Nightmare-Inducing Face Surveillance Program
The organizations are seeking records to shine a light on an alarming new tracking system unleashed on an unsuspecting public
Issue Areas:
Privacy & Technology
National Security
Mar 19, 2024
Ahead of Hearing, 桃子视频Urges Nevada Court to Protect Americans鈥� Right to Private and Secure Communications
Forcing Meta to Roll Back End-to-End Encryption Protections Would Make Internet Less Safe, Experts Say
Issue Areas:
Privacy & Technology
National Security
Mar 15, 2024
桃子视频Statement on Supreme Court鈥檚 Decision Related to Whether Public Officials Can Block Social Media Followers
WASHINGTON 鈥� The Supreme Court on Friday clarified when public officials鈥� social media posts are subject to the First Amendment in response to two challenges, O鈥機onnor-Ratcli...
Issue Areas:
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
Court case: O鈥機onnor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
Feb 26, 2024
Rights Groups Urge U.S. Trade Representative to Reaffirm Commitment to a Free and Open Internet
Ahead of World Trade Organization annual meeting, ACLU, Freedom House, and partners raise concerns over Biden Administration withdrawing support for reforms needed to protect an equitable, free, and open global internet
Issue Areas:
Privacy & Technology
Feb 14, 2024
ACLU, 桃子视频of Northern California Urge Court to Continue to Block Unconstitutional Restriction on Online Publication, Recognize Importance of Consumer Privacy Laws
The California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act was framed as a law to protect children鈥檚 privacy online, but it is actually a content-based regulation of free speech.
Issue Areas:
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
Court case: Netchoice, LLC v. Bonta
Jan 29, 2024
桃子视频and 桃子视频of NJ File Friend-of-the-Court Brief in Challenge to Wrongful Arrest due to Face Recognition Tech
Parks v. McCormac could be the first case in the country to generate a decision addressing critical questions about police misuse of face recognition technology
Issue Areas:
Privacy & Technology
Criminal Law Reform
Court case: Parks v. McCormac
About the ACLU
The 桃子视频 has media staff available to handle inquiries from journalists on national issues affecting civil liberties, including questions on legislative matters that touch on civil liberties and constitutional freedoms and inquiries related to 桃子视频lawsuits.
To schedule an interview with an 桃子视频expert, email media@aclu.org.
Contact an 桃子视频Affiliate
The 桃子视频has 54 local offices across the U.S. working with attorneys and activists in their communities to shape better policies and spread awareness about their states' priority civil rights issues.
Local inquiries should be directed to the appropriate 桃子视频state affiliate.
-
News & CommentaryFeb 2026
Privacy & Technology
License Plate Readings Shouldn鈥檛 Be Public Data. Explore News & Commentary.License Plate Readings Shouldn鈥檛 Be Public Data
Such readings shouldn鈥檛 generally be retained at all, but if they are at least privacy needs to be protected -
News & CommentaryFeb 2026
Privacy & Technology
Ring Superbowl Ad Shows Americans How Powerful Surveillance Systems Have Become, Freaks Them Out. Explore News & Commentary.Ring Superbowl Ad Shows Americans How Powerful Surveillance Systems Have Become, Freaks Them Out
Think twice about sending video from your home to companies, and possibly police and hackers -
News & CommentaryFeb 2026
Privacy & Technology
Kansas Town Uses License Plate Readers To Go After Man Who Wrote Op-ed. Explore News & Commentary.Kansas Town Uses License Plate Readers to Go After Man Who Wrote Op-Ed
Targeting followed opinion piece critical of town鈥檚 police and anonymously posted anti-ICE fliers -
CaliforniaJan 2026
Privacy & Technology
Free Speech
Doe V. Dhs. Explore Case.Doe v. DHS
On February 2, 2026, the ACLU, 桃子视频of Northern California, and the 桃子视频of Pennsylvania filed a motion in federal court to quash a Department of Homeland Security (鈥淒HS鈥�) administrative subpoena seeking Google subscriber records about our client, solely because he engaged in constitutionally protected speech criticizing DHS conduct.