Slashdot Mirror
EU Privacy Watchdogs Seek Assurances on US Data Transfer Pact (reuters.com)
European Union data privacy watchdogs will seek assurances from U.S. authorities that a move by U.S. President Donald Trump to crack down on illegal immigration will not undermine a transatlantic pact protecting the privacy of Europeans' data. From a report: European concerns have been raised by an executive order signed by Trump on Jan. 25 aiming to toughen enforcement of U.S. immigration law. The order directs U.S. agencies to "exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents from the protections of the Privacy Act regarding personally identifiable information." The exemption of foreigners from the U.S. law governing how federal agencies collect and use information about people has stoked worries across the Atlantic about the new administration's approach to privacy and its impact on cross-border data flows.
If the law says these people are included, the President does not have the legal authority to exclude them. As the Executive, his job is to execute the law. Executive orders to exclude execution of the law in specific cases is legislating from the Executive, which is a breach of Presidential power.
On the other hand, if the law currently specifies US Citizens and Permanent Residents and does not specifically exclude others, the Executive is within his discretion to incorporate all lawful visitors to the US in the protections put forth. That is up for debate; however, in the absence of circumstances activating any law requiring the specific action, the Executive can order those protections extended by reasoning that nothing has provided the Executive branch the power or responsibility to carry out those specific actions against which the law protects. The Judiciary has the final say, and typically gives standing to those who are targets of action or loss by lack of action.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Because prior assurrances from U.S. officials, whether to foreign governments (Germany and spying on their Chancellor) or their own citizens, have turned out to be so trustworthy. Give me a break. E.U. officials should assume when it comes to privacy related commitments like this, they cannot trust anything the U.S. government says.
If the executive order invalidates freshly wrought privacy/data protection agreements with the US, and given the recent ruling versus Google, EU companies will no longer find it legal to store customers data on US based multinational clouds. Shooting US tech companies in the foot, but then Trump didnt like them anyway?
In order for the transatlantic protection pact to be undermined, it first has to actually protect anything. Since it is a placebo pact, it doesn't actually protect anything, it cannot be undermined.
We should thank our dear European leaders for their foresight which allowed them to engage in such an incorruptible treaty.
Fun fact: even though we have Data Privacy pacts with both the EU and Canada, we violate them each and every day.
According to the pacts, privacy laws that are required in the EU and Canada are also supposed to apply to all nationals from those countries while they are in the US and its territories.
But.
They're not.
We are spying on you.
We just lie that we're not.
(mind you, this is now being used the other way, so Deep State that, Golden Boy)
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
President can't exclude sections of a law just to suit his own ideals.
I agree with you but consider the ramifications.
Obama let federal laws go unenforced and some of those arent going to be enforced under Trump either. For instance Trump has said marijuana legalization is a State issue not a Federal issue and that he will continue to neglect to enforce Federal marijuana laws. Obama didnt enforce them for different reasons.
On a Federal statute level, our laws rank the crime of possession of schedule 1 substances such as marijuana as worse than murder.
The problem is far too many federal laws. At some point there are so many that the executive branch will have to pick and choose even if they dont want to. We are probably well past that point. I'm sitting in an apartment that probably isnt big enough to store a printed copy of our federal laws.
"His name was James Damore."