Prohibits the search, with or without a warrant, of geolocation and keyword data of a group of people who are under no individual suspicion of having committed a crime, but rather are defined by having been at a given location at a given time or searched particular words, phrases, character strings, or websites.
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A3306
SPONSOR: Solages TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to prohibiting
the search, with or without a warrant, of geolocation and keyword data
of a group of people who are under no individual suspicion of having
committed a crime, but rather are defined by having been at a given
location at a given time or searched particular words, phrases, charac-
ter strings, or websites
SUMMARY:
Section 1. Provides the title of the bill.
Section 2. Amends the criminal procedure law by adding a new article
695.
Section 3. Sets the effective date.
JUSTIFICATION:
Traditionally, judges grant law enforcement officials warrants and data
requests to access a known suspect's location history and/or online
activity when such information is critical to a criminal investigation.
However, judges are increasingly granting more expansive warrants and
data requests to cast wide nets over the digital breadcrumbs of multiple
individuals simultaneously.
Innocent people are caught up in these nets not because they are under
individual suspicion of having committed a crime, but rather, because
they were at a given time and location or have performed interne search-
es for particular words or phrases. Law enforcement performing blanket
reverse data searches is analogous to inspection of every unit in an
apartment building under the suspicion that one contains a weapon - a
practice the Supreme Court previously ruled is unconstitutional. This
bill would protect individual privacy rights by prohibiting law enforce-
ment, with or without a warrant, from acting overly invasive without a
clear target in mind.
Without strong privacy protections, law enforcement agencies will
continue to engage in indiscriminate, bulk data collection which
encroaches on our civil rights.
RACIAL JUSTICE IMPACT:
Numerous studies have shown that wrongful convictions disproportionately
impact people of color.
Disturbingly, these types of warrants were heavily used in the aftermath
of protests in response to the murder of George Floyd. Considering a
report by NYCLU that outlines several high-profile incidents of false
arrest related to digital dragnet warrants, this is an area of law that
must be strengthened.
GENDER JUSTICE IMPACT:
TBD.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2021-22: A84a; referred to Codes.
2019-20: A10246a; referred to Codes.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately.
