Privacy & Technology
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI’s secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs — Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim — insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking “state secrets.” The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the ACLU of Southern California, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View Case
Learn About Privacy & Technology
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2018
Privacy & Technology
Carpenter v. United States
The Supreme Court ruled that the government needs a warrant to access a person’s cellphone location history. The court found in a 5 to 4 decision that obtaining such information is a search under the Fourth Amendment and that a warrant from a judge based on probable cause is required.
Court Case
Dec 2016
Privacy & Technology
Sarkar v. Doe - PubPeer Subpoena Challenge
The ACLU filed a motion in Michigan state court challenging the constitutionality of a subpoena issued to the website PubPeer demanding that it turn over the identities of anonymous commenters. In March 2015, the trial judge ruled that PubPeer had to unmask one – but only one – of the commenters. Both PubPeer and the researcher appealed, and the ruling was upheld in December 2016.
All Cases
82 Privacy & Technology Cases
Virginia
Aug 2026
Privacy & Technology
National Security
In Re: Application of The United States Of America for an Order Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d)
Explore case
Virginia
Aug 2026
Privacy & Technology
National Security
In Re: Application of The United States Of America for an Order Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d)
New York
Jul 2026
Privacy & Technology
Leslie v. City of New York
Explore case
New York
Jul 2026
Privacy & Technology
Leslie v. City of New York
Florida
Jun 2026
Privacy & Technology
Dillon v. City of Jacksonville Beach
On June 10, 2026, the ACLU and ACLU of Florida, with the law firm of Hoguet Newman Regal & Kenney, LLP, filed a wrongful arrest suit on behalf of Robert Dillon, a Florida man who was wrongfully arrested after police relied on an incorrect result from facial recognition technology.
Explore case
Florida
Jun 2026
Privacy & Technology
Dillon v. City of Jacksonville Beach
On June 10, 2026, the ACLU and ACLU of Florida, with the law firm of Hoguet Newman Regal & Kenney, LLP, filed a wrongful arrest suit on behalf of Robert Dillon, a Florida man who was wrongfully arrested after police relied on an incorrect result from facial recognition technology.
Texas Supreme Court
May 2026
Privacy & Technology
Civil Liberties
Nguyen v. State
This case concerns the constitutionality of a highly intrusive law enforcement practice: the use of geofence warrants. Geofence warrants compel tech companies like Google to provide to law enforcement location data from every cell phone likely to have been within a certain area during a given time window. Then, law enforcement officers decide for themselves which users to focus on, and demand additional location information—and eventually identifying information—for the users they select. Geofence warrants raise grave constitutional concerns, including that (1) they authorize dragnet searches that sweep up the private data of many people without probable cause to believe that all or any of them were involved in any crime, and (2) they allow law enforcement officers to decide which users to focus on for additional data collection without judicial oversight. This case therefore has significant implications for Texans’ ability to secure their digital privacy and property against unjustified government intrusion.
Explore case
Texas Supreme Court
May 2026
Privacy & Technology
Civil Liberties
Nguyen v. State
This case concerns the constitutionality of a highly intrusive law enforcement practice: the use of geofence warrants. Geofence warrants compel tech companies like Google to provide to law enforcement location data from every cell phone likely to have been within a certain area during a given time window. Then, law enforcement officers decide for themselves which users to focus on, and demand additional location information—and eventually identifying information—for the users they select. Geofence warrants raise grave constitutional concerns, including that (1) they authorize dragnet searches that sweep up the private data of many people without probable cause to believe that all or any of them were involved in any crime, and (2) they allow law enforcement officers to decide which users to focus on for additional data collection without judicial oversight. This case therefore has significant implications for Texans’ ability to secure their digital privacy and property against unjustified government intrusion.
Virginia
Apr 2026
Privacy & Technology
Schmidt v. Norfolk
Whether Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) systems violate individuals’ expectations of privacy under the Fourth Amendment.
Explore case
Virginia
Apr 2026
Privacy & Technology
Schmidt v. Norfolk
Whether Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) systems violate individuals’ expectations of privacy under the Fourth Amendment.