Internet Privacy
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
Learn About Internet Privacy
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
7 Internet Privacy Cases
![Wells v. State of Texas](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Texas
Internet Privacy
Wells v. State of Texas
Apr 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case
Northern California
Feb 2024
![A finger pressign a keyboard.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/10/online-freedom-social-600x314.jpg)
Netchoice, LLC v. Bonta
This amicus brief highlights the constitutional defects of a California law that purports to protect consumer privacy but is actually an impermissible, content-based regulation of online speech. The brief urges that this law should be struck down while emphasizing that the court should rule narrowly and leave paths open for other consumer privacy laws to withstand First Amendment challenge.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![A finger pressign a keyboard.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/10/online-freedom-social-600x314.jpg)
Northern California
Internet Privacy
Privacy & Technology
Netchoice, LLC v. Bonta
This amicus brief highlights the constitutional defects of a California law that purports to protect consumer privacy but is actually an impermissible, content-based regulation of online speech. The brief urges that this law should be struck down while emphasizing that the court should rule narrowly and leave paths open for other consumer privacy laws to withstand First Amendment challenge.
Feb 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case
May 2023
![iPhone with "Get a Warrant - ACLU" sticker](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web16-blog-getawarrant-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
The Warrant Clause in the Digital Age
The information generated by today’s digital devices and online services reveals private matters far beyond what one could learn from physical analogs. In a series of legal filings and a white paper, available below, the ACLU has argued that to keep apace with technological developments and adequately protect our privacy, the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement must be interpreted robustly. Seizures and searches of digital data must be cabined to probable cause, limited to specific categories of information relevant to the investigation, and closely overseen by a neutral magistrate.
View case
![iPhone with "Get a Warrant - ACLU" sticker](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web16-blog-getawarrant-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Internet Privacy
National Security
The Warrant Clause in the Digital Age
The information generated by today’s digital devices and online services reveals private matters far beyond what one could learn from physical analogs. In a series of legal filings and a white paper, available below, the ACLU has argued that to keep apace with technological developments and adequately protect our privacy, the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement must be interpreted robustly. Seizures and searches of digital data must be cabined to probable cause, limited to specific categories of information relevant to the investigation, and closely overseen by a neutral magistrate.
May 2023
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2023
![Social media apps on a smart phone.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/04/WEB21-Social-Media-Apps-Standard-Header-1110x740-1-600x400.jpg)
Twitter, Inc., v. Taamneh
The Supreme Court will decide whether a social media or other platform can be liable for “aiding and abetting” a terrorist attack merely because it failed to adequately block content valorizing terrorism, even where the platform has policies barring terrorist content.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Social media apps on a smart phone.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/04/WEB21-Social-Media-Apps-Standard-Header-1110x740-1-600x400.jpg)
U.S. Supreme Court
Internet Privacy
+2 Issues
Twitter, Inc., v. Taamneh
The Supreme Court will decide whether a social media or other platform can be liable for “aiding and abetting” a terrorist attack merely because it failed to adequately block content valorizing terrorism, even where the platform has policies barring terrorist content.
Feb 2023
Status: Closed (Judgment)
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)
Internet Privacy
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