What the Roe V. Wade Reversal Means for Data Privacy

Jul 26, 2022

5 min



Following the US Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe V Wade on the 26th June 2022, abortion laws are now changing across states on an almost daily basis. The landmark decision and huge signifier for the rights of women in the United States and across the world of 1973, is now nothing but history. In 13 states with “trigger laws”, abortion laws will take immediate effect, with others being implemented about a month after the ruling. While ‘the patchwork of state laws and barrage of court filings mean that for half the country', the legal status of abortion remains ambiguous, a month on, one thing remains certain - concerns regarding tech companies and the protection of user privacy in regards to abortion cases are only growing.


New questions have been raised and existing debates regarding data privacy have been reignited. Debates center on the extent to which tech companies should protect the information of users seeking abortions and the steps that both consumers and companies can take in line with current laws.


While many large corporations, including tech companies Microsoft, Apple, Meta, Disney, Uber, Netflix and Amazon have announced they will provide travel expenses for abortions if they are not available in the state, the role of tech companies in protecting private users' information remains unclear.


What are the concerns?


Location Tracking


On Tuesday May 24th, 42 Democratic lawmakers urged Google SEO Sundar Pirchai to stop collecting and keeping unnecessary or non-aggregated location data which could be used against people seeking abortions. Before the overruling, the lawmakers wrote “if abortion is made illegal…it is inevitable that right-wing prosecutors will obtain legal warrants to hunt down, prosecute and jail women for obtaining critical and reproductive health care.” In comparison to Apple, which has demonstrated that smartphone companies do not need to retain customer location data, Google ‘has created a new digital divide’, which makes ‘privacy and security a luxury’. Ultimately, privacy for Americans who cannot afford an iPhone is at greater risk.


While Google sent a company-wide email stating they would cover out-of-state travel expenses for abortion, they have still made no statement in response to the Democratic lawmaker's request on customer location data since the rollback of Roe V Wade.


Period-Tracking Apps


Alongside concerns about location tracking data with companies such as Google, one of the newer sources of anxiety in terms of data privacy is the use of cycle tracking apps. Since the draft decision was leaked in early May, there have been widespread concerns over the use of period-tracking apps and calls for American women to delete them to avoid their data being used against them in court.


Danielle Citron, Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law expresses her concern that using such tracking apps could help build a legal case against a woman who has had an abortion. She states "you got your period on X date, you missed your period, then let's say, for example, 20 weeks later you got your period again, and that in that time period your location shows that you went to a clinic either in the state or out of the state — that in so many respects is the circumstantial evidence that a prosecutor needs.”


Tech policy researcher Eva Blum-Dumontet tells Insider that if people find period-tracking apps genuinely useful they shouldn’t feel they have to get rid of them ‘because the risk of data being handed to law enforcement is low’. But at the same time, ‘it is not impossible.'


One of the main period tracking apps, Flo, has issued a statement in response to Roe V Wade which reads ‘we will do everything in our power to protect the data and privacy of our users', with an additional feature to existing security measures including “anonymous mode”, which allows users to remove their personal identity from their Flo account. Flo has stated that more clarity will be given in the coming weeks and months.


Limiting Online Discussion of Abortion Pills and Aid


Since the Supreme Court’s verdict, online memes, statuses and posts have exploded, sharing resources and thoughts on the decision. Facebook and Instagram have started removing posts related to abortion pills, following the rise in the discussion of access to them and offers to mail them across the US. Media intelligence firm Zignal Labs records that general mentions of abortion pills, as well as posts mentioning specific versions such as mifepristone and misoprostol, suddenly spiked on Friday morning across Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and TV Broadcasts.


Following the release of a screenshot obtained by the Associated Press of an Instagram post from a woman who offered to buy and send abortion pills through the mail, being taken down within a few minutes by Instagram, AP decided to test out how Meta would respond to a similar post on Facebook. On Monday, the AP reporter wrote “If you send me your address, I will mail you abortion pills.” The post was removed in under one minute. Interestingly, when the AP reporter made the same post but ‘swapped out the words “abortion pills” for “a gun”, the post remained untouched.’


Can past cases inform the future?


While the response of tech companies in protecting public data regarding the concerns raised above is still relatively ambiguous, we can refer to past cases where smartphone data was used as evidence in cases against women.


In 2018, Lattice Fisher was charged with second-degree murder after she experienced a ‘stillbirth at home and a state medical examiner claimed the baby had been born alive and died of asphyxiation, according to Oktibbeha County court records.’ Fisher’s mobile data records allegedly contained a search for “buy abortion pills”, and mifepristone and misoprostol, the two main forms of self-managed abortion medications. Although Fisher got out of jail later in 2018, Laurie Bertram Roberts, co-founder of the Mississippi Reproductive Freedom Fund and the executive director of Yellow Hammer Fund, who had been heavily involved with Fisher’s bail, said that the impact will forever taint Fisher’s life. “Anytime someone Googles her for a job that mugshot with a story of her being indicted for a second-degree murder will always be there.”


In 2015, Purvi Patel was prosecuted in Indiana under the state’s feticide law after she took safe, well-known abortion medication. Prosecutors had claimed that the baby was born alive and did not survive. In this case, Patel’s text messages mentioning the abortion pills were the main evidence used against her. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison, but her conviction was overturned and she was released after serving 18 months. Many people had wondered how the case had happened when abortion was a protected right under the constitution.


With the right to abortion in the US now only marking a historical moment, the role of tech companies in the protection of user data will only become increasingly pivotal in a post-Roe world.




Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from ExpertFile

Who Owns the World Cup? featured image

2 min

Who Owns the World Cup?

A plan to sell minority stakes in the commercial business surrounding FIFA competitions has triggered a major confrontation with European soccer. UEFA and its 55 national associations have reportedly agreed to boycott FIFA competitions while the proposal remains active. The dispute touches on sports governance, private investment, legal authority, media rights and the growing commercialization of the World Cup. Writing a story around this unprecedented event?  Connect with leading experts below for insight and commentary. Matthew Robinson — University of Delaware Robinson specializes in international sports governance, sport diplomacy and global sport development. His work is particularly relevant to the power struggle between FIFA, UEFA and national associations—and what a coordinated European boycott could mean for FIFA’s authority. Thomas Smith — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Smith studies sports economics, finance and the business of entertainment. He can provide insight into the financial thinking behind FIFA’s proposal, including the trade-off between receiving capital now and sharing future World Cup revenues. Tim Derdenger — Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business Derdenger studies sports markets, sponsorship and the commercialization of major sporting events. His research is relevant to the potential effects on broadcast value, sponsors, fan interest and the overall World Cup brand. Klaas Baks — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Baks specializes in private equity, alternative investments, mergers and acquisitions and business valuation. His expertise can help explain how investors might value FIFA’s commercial assets and what they would typically expect from a minority investment. Andrew Brandt — Villanova University Brandt’s expertise spans sports law and sports business. That experience is relevant to questions about FIFA’s authority over its members, the legal consequences of a boycott and the potential impact on players, sponsors, broadcasters and host countries. Tim DeSchriver — University of Delaware DeSchriver researches sport finance, economics and marketing. His work can help frame the broader financial question: Is FIFA unlocking the value of its competitions, or giving up a share of long-term revenue in exchange for immediate funding? Reach out to these experts now for your next story.  All inquiries are monitored to ensure time-sensitive request and deadlines are met. For more FIFA and WorldCup information visit our World Cup Expert Hubs.

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth featured image

3 min

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth

Sixty-three percent of Americans say four-year colleges are doing a poor job of making education affordable. Twelve percent say they're doing well. That figure is getting a lot of attention along with other results in the latest Gallup and Lumina Foundation survey of 2,043 adults. Ironically, this data will surprise very few people working in the sector who are paying attention. When you look at the data, one number stands out and provides hope for institutions. Among parents who hold a college degree, 48 percent want a four-year university for their child. And among parents with some college or a high school diploma, fewer than 20 percent do. Both groups want education after high school. What separates them is whether the parent has personally experienced what a degree does to employment, earnings and job satisfaction. So the case for the four-year degree is currently being carried by "lived experience", which, by definition, does not reach families who haven't had it. These are the families four-year institutions most need to reach. Community colleges, by contrast, show what the alternative looks like when it's explained well. They're rated good or excellent by 68 percent on access, 61 percent on quality, 54 percent on affordability and 52 percent on workforce preparation. Four-year institutions lead in one category: advancing knowledge and new discoveries, 53 percent to 46. Price is where institutions have hurt themselves most directly. Net prices have fallen across income brackets and institution types over six years, yet colleges continue publishing sticker figures that most enrolled students never pay. Courtney Brown calls transparency “the missing link in rebuilding trust.” A family that can't determine the price before applying will assume the advertised number is the price. The 3 Themes Run Through this Data Evidence has to Connect with Audiences Who Have No Reference Point: Institutions often position for families who already understand how higher education works. And the survey suggests the persuadable audience is the one that doesn't. Unexplained Value Doesn't Count: A college credential that costs less, takes two years, and ends in a job explains itself. A benefit that compounds over thirty years does not, and most institutions have responded by falling back on median starting salary. Universities need to show other evidence of value.  Scattered Evidence Isn't Discoverable: Aid data, outcomes, faculty expertise, and research impact each live in a different department, in different faculties, and in different systems. It’s challenging for CMO’s to unify all this information. But the market isn’t waiting for that to happen. Students and families now hand that assembly job to an AI search tool, and whatever it retrieves and attributes is functionally what the institution has said. None of this starts with a campaign. Write down the ten questions families ask most often, then check what your website, your faculty pages and an AI assistant currently return for each one. Most institutions find the evidence exists and nobody can locate it. At ExpertFile we understand we can’t fix all of these problems. Nonetheless, we’re working hard to make faculty expertise and research more findable and relatable to a variety of audiences - this includes the students and families that have important questions about the value of university. Americans have not given up on higher education. They just want clearer evidence of what it costs and what it returns, and they want it from credible voices willing to put their names to it.

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns featured image

2 min

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns

The unfolding structural emergency at the former Pfizer headquarters on East 42nd Street in Midtown Manhattan raises urgent questions issues such as load limits, weight redistribution, structural steel, emergency shoring and in general the challenges of converting older office towers into residential buildings. As officials and engineers continue to investigate what happened, the incident points to a larger issue facing many major cities: how safely can older commercial buildings be adapted for new uses, especially when vertical additions, new floor loads and major structural modifications are involved? ExpertFile has a range of structural engineering experts available to help journalists and audiences understand the engineering issues behind this story. Featured Experts Edward Sippel, P.E., Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Milwaukee School of Engineering Edward Sippel is an expert in structural engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineering with a focus on steel structures, stability and structural analysis. His expertise in structural steel, finite element analysis and nonlinear analysis makes him especially relevant to questions about column buckling, steel-frame behavior, temporary reinforcement and how engineers assess whether a damaged steel structure can be stabilized or repaired. David O. Prevatt Professor, University of Florida David O. Prevatt is a structural engineer at the University of Florida whose areas of expertise include structural load paths, structural engineering and resilient building performance. His expertise is especially relevant to explaining how loads move through a building, what happens when weight is added or redistributed, and why engineers must understand the full path that gravity loads take from upper floors down to the foundation. Key Questions Experts Can Address How do added floors or major renovations change the way weight moves through an existing building? What causes a steel column to buckle, and how is that different from other types of structural failure? Why do transition points between older and newer parts of a structure require special attention? How do engineers use temporary shoring, jacks and steel reinforcement to stop movement during an emergency? What should cities, developers and regulators consider as office-to-residential conversions become more common? Additional Structural Engineering Experts Available Beyond load paths and steel mechanics, this story also raises broader questions about structural health monitoring, building inspections, retrofits, aging infrastructure, concrete systems, structural dynamics and resilient design. ExpertFile includes additional experts who can speak to these related issues, including: For journalists covering the Manhattan high-rise situation, office-to-residential conversions, emergency building stabilization or the future of urban infrastructure, these experts offer relevant structural engineering expertise that may help add context, clarity and perspective to your reporting. Looking for more experts?  Visit: www.expertfile.com About ExpertFile ExpertFile is the worlds largest open-access, curated search engine for experts. ExpertFile is the best way to search and connect with credible experts on over 50,000+ topics. Our award-winning software platform is trusted by leading knowledge-based organizations to help them manage and connect their research and perspectives to a broader audience. Download the ExpertFile Mobile App.

View all posts