Facebook sparked outrage by giving in to US police investigating an abortion case, fueling simmering fears that the platform could be a tool to stem the procedure.
Criticism built after media reports revealed that the social networking giant had leaked message keys to a mother criminally charged with aborting her daughter.
Advocates had warned of just such things after America’s top court revoked national abortion rights in late June, because big tech companies hold a wealth of data on users’ locations and behavior.
Jessica Burgess, 41, has been accused of helping her 17-year-old daughter terminate a pregnancy in the midwestern state of Nebraska.
She faces five charges – including one under a 2010 law that only allows abortions up to 20 weeks after conception.
The daughter faces three charges, including one of concealing or leaving a body.
But Facebook owner Meta defended himself Tuesday by noting that the Nebraska court order “did not mention abortion at all,” and came before the Supreme Court’s highly controversial June decision overturning Roe v Wade, the case that established the right on abortion in the United States.
“That sentence seems to imply that *if* the search mentioned abortion, there would be a different finding. But of course that’s not true,” tweeted Logan Koepke, who studies how technology impacts issues like criminal justice.
When asked about the release of the data, Silicon Valley giant AFP cited its policy of honoring government requests when “the law requires us to do so.”
Nebraska’s restrictions were passed years before Roe was repealed. About 16 states have outright bans or restrictions in their jurisdictions during the first few weeks of pregnancy.
– ‘Encrypted chats cannot be shared’ –
For observers of the tech world, the Nebraska case will certainly not be the last.
“This will continue to happen to companies that have massive amounts of data on people across the country and around the world,” said Alexandra Givens, CEO of the nonprofit Center for Democracy & Technology.
She went on to say that companies that receive a properly issued legal request have strong incentives under applicable law to comply with that request.
“Companies must at least ensure they insist on full legal process, that search warrants are specific and not a fishing expedition, that searches are interpreted very narrowly, and that they notify users so users can try to push them back.” added Givens.
Meta did not provide AFP with the Nebraska court’s order. The police filing asked the judge to order the company not to tell Burgess’ daughter about the search warrant on her Facebook messages.
“I have reason to believe that notifying the subscriber or customer of the issuance of this search warrant may result in the destruction or tampering of evidence,” wrote Police Detective Ben McBride.
He told the court he began investigating “concerns” in late April that Burgess’ daughter had prematurely given birth to a “stillborn child” who they allegedly buried together.
Proponents noted that aside from not using Meta’s products, a surefire way to keep users’ communications out of government hands is to automatically encrypt them.
Meta-owned WhatsApp has end-to-end encryption, meaning the company has no access to the information, but this level of privacy isn’t Facebook Messenger’s default setting.
“The company has never said it would not comply with a law enforcement request in an abortion-related situation,” said Caitlin Seeley George, campaigns director for advocacy Fight for the Future.
“If users could rely on encrypted messages, Meta wouldn’t even be able to share conversations,” she added.
#fears #Facebooks #role #abortion #case
