We propose a solution to fix the perceived defects in U.S. surveillance law identified recently by the EU’s judicial branch.
Latest in Court of Justice for the European Union
The decision of the European Court of Justice in Schrems II is gobsmacking in its mix of judicial imperialism and Eurocentric hypocrisy.
The context and possible implications of Advocate General Henrik Saugmandsgaard Øe’s opinion in Data Protection Commissions v. Facebook Ireland.
The advocate general’s opinion details some important new jurisprudence about how the EU may look at foreign intelligence surveillance in the future.
It’s been a busy two weeks for the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Last week, the court handed down a landmark decision in favor of Google; this Thursday, Oct. 3, it released a blockbuster ruling against Facebook.
Europe’s highest court issued two huge rulings on Sept. 25 regarding the implementation of the EU’s “Right to Be Forgotten.” Both decisions involve a long-standing dispute between Google and France’s data authority, the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL); both have considerable implications for the cross-border regulation of the internet.
The Irish High Court is considering a potential landmark case on the legality of transferring personal data from the European Union to the United States. A large portion of E.U. data transfers operates under “Standard Contract Clauses” (SCCs), boilerplate language widely adopted in written agreements. A central issue in Schrems v. Facebook is whether U.S. surveillance, when conducted within the U.S., is so pervasive that data transferred to the U.S. via SCCs lack “adequate” protection of privacy.