It is becoming more obvious that Roe’s end will be very different from before Roe. This is in large part due to the importance of data.
Since the Supreme Court ruled abortion access was not a constitutional right in the United States, many states have already passed bans. This is in addition to the expected two dozen other states that will ban or restrict the procedure.
A wave of women have decided to delete their menstrual cycles apps after the court ruling. They are concerned about being incriminated in the future. Some have suggested that social media users use coded language to discuss abortion access in order to avoid law enforcement’s attention. Some Democratic legislators are also working to improve privacy protections for people’s personal data relating to reproductive health.
While there are still many unknowns about the use of evidence and how it will be used, advocates for digital privacy encourage both supporters and abortion seekers to exercise caution.
Nathan Wessler, deputy project director for the Speech, Privacy and Technology Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, stated that “the police have unprecedented access to information about us” in their investigations.
He said, “We will likely see in states which are banning abortions, really invasive probes into people who seek medical care.”
Data experts predict that it’s not only call history, text messages, and emails that could be used to prosecute but also location data and online payment records, Google search results, and fertility tracking apps.
This list is only a partial one. Personal data can be very confusing. It’s not clear how much information we produce or who can access it.
Wessler stated that “we live in a digital age where our activities, transactions, and communications leave a trail of digital footprints.” It is extremely difficult to erase all digital trails that could be of use to law enforcement.
He is also concerned that the police will conduct invasive digital investigations of a large number of people seeking to have their reproductive health care.
He said that a woman who presents to an emergency room following a miscarriage could suddenly be subject to police searching through every digital communication record she has to determine if it is a miscarriage.
Electronic Frontier Foundation, an advocate for digital privacy, claims that period tracking apps aren’t a danger to women who want abortions in countries where they are banned. The group suggests that criminal investigations are more common using text messages, browsing histories, and emails. The group suggests encryption and monitoring your phone’s privacy settings.
In some states, law enforcement may not be the only ones who have access to personal data.
Texas, Oklahoma, and Idaho have all passed citizen-enforced bans on abortion. This means anyone can file a civil suit if they believe that an abortion was performed, and potentially win at least $10,000.
According to Eva Galperin (Director of Cybersecurity at EFF), the bounty system will allow plaintiffs to request troves data to help build their case.
Galperin says that while there is still much to learn about who could be sued and what types of digital investigations might take place, there is still uncertainty.
Galperin said, “It is terrifying.” It’s suddenly much more difficult to know who to trust if you’re providing abortion support.
Privacy experts are worried about the unknown nature of how the increasing number of state laws that criminalize abortions in states will be applied.
Galperin stated that they are often vaguely and broadly written and this is their purpose. Galperin stated that they wanted people seeking abortions or providing support for abortion to assume the worst, and not act.
Galperin believes that the threat of digital surveillance will not stop people seeking or supporting such procedures, but it will present a great risk to those seeking care and impactdisproportionately on pregnant women of color.
Galperin stated that “people of color have always served as guineas pigs for surveillance and cracking down on any unwanted behavior in the United States.”
Wessler also said that not everyone has the tech skills, time, and effort necessary to prevent leaving a digital trail. This is why he thinks the federal government should do more to protect pregnant women in crisis.
He says, “If our data are out there for the taking without protections from corporate misuse or government misuse, then we’re in a bad spot.” “This is why we need better legal structures to safeguard us.”
