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.

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.

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.

The ACLU has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to compel the disclosure of a legal opinion authored by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. The lawsuit, filed in November 2015, enforces an earlier Freedom of Information Act request.