Privacy & Technology
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI’s secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs — Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim — insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking “state secrets.” The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the ACLU of Southern California, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View Case
Learn About Privacy & Technology
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2018
![image](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/car_trail_by_joe_a_credit-600x397.jpg)
Carpenter v. United States
The Supreme Court ruled that the government needs a warrant to access a person’s cellphone location history. The court found in a 5 to 4 decision that obtaining such information is a search under the Fourth Amendment and that a warrant from a judge based on probable cause is required.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
Dec 2016
![Privacy and technology](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB15-SiteImages-Feature-PrivacyTech-1012x729-600x432.jpg)
Sarkar v. Doe - PubPeer Subpoena Challenge
The ACLU filed a motion in Michigan state court challenging the constitutionality of a subpoena issued to the website PubPeer demanding that it turn over the identities of anonymous commenters. In March 2015, the trial judge ruled that PubPeer had to unmask one – but only one – of the commenters. Both PubPeer and the researcher appealed, and the ruling was upheld in December 2016.
View case
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
All Cases
67 Privacy & Technology Cases
May 2020
![stingray cell site simulator](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/12/WEB19-Stingray-Cell-Site-Simulator-BlogImage-WordPress-1110x740-600x400.jpg)
ACLU v. CBP - FOIA Case for CBP and ICE Records Related to the Use of Cell-Site Simulator Technology
On May 19, 2017, ACLU submitted a FOIA request to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) demanding records on the federal government's acquisition and use of "cell site simulators" (also known as "Stingrays" or "IMSI catchers"), powerful surveillance devices that target cell phones by impersonating a wireless service provider's cell tower. For more than two years, the two agencies failed to properly process the Request or produce any responsive records until the ACLU sued on December 11, 2019.
View case
![stingray cell site simulator](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/12/WEB19-Stingray-Cell-Site-Simulator-BlogImage-WordPress-1110x740-600x400.jpg)
Privacy & Technology
ACLU v. CBP - FOIA Case for CBP and ICE Records Related to the Use of Cell-Site Simulator Technology
On May 19, 2017, ACLU submitted a FOIA request to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) demanding records on the federal government's acquisition and use of "cell site simulators" (also known as "Stingrays" or "IMSI catchers"), powerful surveillance devices that target cell phones by impersonating a wireless service provider's cell tower. For more than two years, the two agencies failed to properly process the Request or produce any responsive records until the ACLU sued on December 11, 2019.
May 2020
View case
Jan 2020
![ACLU v. US Department of Justice](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
ACLU v. US Department of Justice
The ACLU, ACLU of Northern California, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Stanford Law School’s Riana Pfefferkorn are petitioning to unseal a secret judicial ruling reportedly holding that the Department of Justice cannot force Facebook to alter Facebook Messenger in order to enable the FBI to conduct wiretaps in an investigation. The petition, initially filed in the Eastern District of California, argues that the First Amendment and common-law require public access to the legal ruling as well as to the docket sheet and certain other portions of the underlying proceeding.
View case
![ACLU v. US Department of Justice](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Privacy & Technology
ACLU v. US Department of Justice
The ACLU, ACLU of Northern California, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Stanford Law School’s Riana Pfefferkorn are petitioning to unseal a secret judicial ruling reportedly holding that the Department of Justice cannot force Facebook to alter Facebook Messenger in order to enable the FBI to conduct wiretaps in an investigation. The petition, initially filed in the Eastern District of California, argues that the First Amendment and common-law require public access to the legal ruling as well as to the docket sheet and certain other portions of the underlying proceeding.
Jan 2020
View case
![ACLU v. DOJ, FBI & DEA](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Privacy & Technology
ACLU v. DOJ, FBI & DEA
Oct 2019
Status: Ongoing
View case
Massachusetts
Oct 2019
![Facial Recognition Image](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/facial recog.jpg)
ACLU v. Department of Justice - FOIA Lawsuit Demanding Information About Facial Recognition Technology
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Facial Recognition Image](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/facial recog.jpg)
Massachusetts
Privacy & Technology
ACLU v. Department of Justice - FOIA Lawsuit Demanding Information About Facial Recognition Technology
Oct 2019
Status: Ongoing
View case
May 2019
![A white hand on a computer mouse side by side with a black hand on a computer mouse](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/Mouse_V04_1160x864 -600x447.jpg)
Sandvig v. Barr — Challenge to CFAA Prohibition on Uncovering Racial Discrimination Online
The ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which makes it a federal crime to access a computer in a manner that “exceeds authorized access.” This provision of the law often prohibits and chills academics, researchers, and journalists from testing for discrimination on the internet. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in June 2016. The plaintiffs are academic researchers, computer scientists, and journalists who wish to investigate companies’ online practices through standard academic and journalistic techniques, but are limited by the terms of service of target websites.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![A white hand on a computer mouse side by side with a black hand on a computer mouse](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/Mouse_V04_1160x864 -600x447.jpg)
Privacy & Technology
+2 Issues
Sandvig v. Barr — Challenge to CFAA Prohibition on Uncovering Racial Discrimination Online
The ACLU has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which makes it a federal crime to access a computer in a manner that “exceeds authorized access.” This provision of the law often prohibits and chills academics, researchers, and journalists from testing for discrimination on the internet. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in June 2016. The plaintiffs are academic researchers, computer scientists, and journalists who wish to investigate companies’ online practices through standard academic and journalistic techniques, but are limited by the terms of service of target websites.
May 2019
Status: Ongoing
View case