CDT Argues for Preserving Individual Right to File Claims In Privacy Violations
The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) has filed an amicus brief in Spokeo v. Robins, calling on the Supreme Court to preserve the ability of individuals to file private claims for privacy violations as granted by federal laws. CDT is joined on the brief by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, New America’s Open Technology Institute, and the World Privacy Forum.
In this case, Thomas Robins filed a claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) against Spokeo, a data broker, as Spokeo’s report on Robins contained inaccuracies. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the existence of inaccuracies in the report gave Robins standing to sue under the FCRA, as provided by Congress. Spokeo appealed that decision to the Supreme Court in 2014.
“The proliferation of data online means that it’s more important than ever to ensure that that data is as accurate as possible. In the digital age, the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s private right of action plays a central role in promoting accuracy and limiting unfair decisions, just as it did when it was first enacted forty-five years ago. Limiting the ability of individuals to file claims would be a step in the wrong direction,” said G.S. Hans, CDT’s Policy Counsel.
The Spokeo case presents the critical question: does the creation of a private right of action under federal law — in this case, the FCRA — satisfy constitutional requirements for standing in federal court, absent any other injury? Because many privacy claims have statutory violations as the most evident injury, a heightened injury requirement would preclude many private cases. The FCRA’s creation of a private right of action was deliberate and necessary to promote individual privacy. These rights are even more relevant today than they were when the FCRA was passed.
The spread of inaccurate information online is both pervasive and potentially catastrophic for individuals, especially considering how data such as that used in credit reports can affect loan, housing, and employment decisions.
“A broad ruling in this case could prevent claims under a host of other federal privacy laws that remain relevant in the modern era, going well beyond the Fair Credit Reporting Act,” Hans added.
The amicus brief of CDT and its allies can be found here.
