California Leads on Reproductive and Trans Health Information Privacy.

In the Supreme Court Dobbs Decision, anti-choice sheriffs and bounty hunters try to investigate and punish abortion seekers. Internet browsing, Personal messageAnd Phone app Local data. We can expect similar tactics from government officials who say they should be parents to allow transgender youth access to gender-affirming health care. Child abuse investigation.

So that’s great news for California Governor Gavin Newsom. Only Signed Three bills help address these concerns: Father 1242Written in asthma. Rebecca Bauer-Kahan; Father in 2091 ADWritten in asthma. Mia Bonta; And SB 107Written by Sean Scott Wiener. EFF is supported all of them three Accounts.

This post summarizes the new California data privacy protections and provides a list of specific areas where California state law changes. For those interested, we’ve included quotes for these changes. These three new laws limit how California courts, government agencies, health care providers and businesses handle this information. Some provisions create new exemptions from existing disclosure obligations. Others create new restrictions on disclosure.

EFF encourages other states to pass similar bills consistent with their own state civil and criminal laws.

Exemption from old disclosure obligations for new reproductive and trans health information

Law enforcement agencies and private litigants often seek evidence located in other states. In response, many states have enacted various laws requiring in-state entities to share information with out-of-state entities. Now that anti-choice states are increasingly criminalizing abortion, pro-choice states must create abortion exceptions to these sharing mandates. Likewise, now that anti-trans governments are saying that gender-affirming care for trans youth is child abuse, pro-trans governments should create health care exceptions that are separate from these shared mandates. California’s new laws do this in three ways.

First, an existing one California law When California-based providers of electronic communications and remote computing services receive an out-of-state order, they must treat it as an in-state order. AB 1242 would create abortion. A provider may not produce records if it “knows or should know” that the investigation involves a “prohibited violation.” (watch out Sec. 8, Penal Code 1524.2(c)(1).) A “prohibited violation” is an abortion that is legal in California but illegal elsewhere. (watch out Sec 2, Penal Code 629.51(5).) In addition, warrants must ensure that the investigation does not involve a prohibited violation. (watch out Sec. 8, Penal Code 1524.2(c)(2)).

Second, without existing California law It requires state courts to help enforce out-of-state judicial orders. This is the California Uniform Law Commission (ULCs) version. Interstate Deposit and Discovery Act. California requires court clerks to issue subpoenas when requested by litigants who have subpoenas from an out-of-state judge. California attorneys can also issue court orders in such situations.

AB 2091 and SB 107 create new abortion and transgender health exemptions from existing law:

• California clerks and attorneys will not issue a subpoena based on an out-of-state subpoena if it is related to a “foreign penalty civil action” and requires information about “sensitive services.” (watch out Father 2091, Sec. 4.5, in Code Civ. Pro. 2029.300(e)(2); Father in 2091 AD, sec 5.5, in CV. Pro. 2029.350(c).; SB 107, Sec. 2.5, in Code Civ. Pro. 2029.300(e)(2).; SB 107, Sec. 3.5, in Code Civ. Pro. 2029. 350 (c)) A “foreign criminal civil action” is a prosecution outside a state “to punish an offense committed against the public justice of that state.” (watch out Sec 3, in CV. Pro. 2029.200(b).)”Sensitive services” includes sexual health care and gender-affirming health care.
• California clerks and attorneys also must not issue a subpoena based on an out-of-state subpoena if it is based on laws that interfere with a transgender child’s right to access gender-affirming health care. (watch out Father 2091, Sec. 4.5, in Code Civ. Pro. 2029.300(e)(1).; Father 2091, Sec 5.5, in civ. Pro. 2029.350(b).; SB 107, Sec. 2.5, in Code Civ. Pro. 2029.300(e)(1).; SB 107, Sec. 3.5, in Code Civ. Pro. 2029.350(b)).

Third, without existing California law Requires health care providers to disclose certain medical information to certain parties. AB 2091 and SB 107 create new abortion and transgender health exemptions from existing law:

• Providers may not release medical information about an abortion to law enforcement or in response to a subpoena based on an out-of-state law that interferes with California abortion rights or a foreign criminal civil action. (watch out Father 2091, Sec. 2, Civil Code 56.108)
• Providers also may not provide medical information about a person who consented to a child’s access to gender-affirming care, to an out-of-state criminal or civil prosecution against that person. (watch out S.b. 107, Sec. 1, Civil Code 56.109; Sec. 10, Penal Code 1326(c))

These are all important steps to free yourself from old sharing obligations. But that’s not all these three new California bills do.

New restrictions on California judges

To protect the privacy of people seeking reproductive health care, these new laws limit the power of California courts to authorize or compel the disclosure of reproductive health information.

First, AB 1242 prohibits California judges from authorizing certain types of digital surveillance if it is done for the purposes of investigating legal abortions in California. These are:

• Hacking of wire or electronic communications. (watch out Sec. 3, Penal Code 629.52(e).) interception captures the content of communications such as the words of an email.
• A pen register or trap and tracking device. (watch out Sec. 5, Penal Code 638.52(m).) These devices contain communications such as who called and when.
• Order for any item. (watch out Sec. 7, Penal Code 1524(h).) This includes digital tools that contain abortion evidence, such as calendar entries.

Second, AB 1242 prohibits California judges and clerks of courts from issuing subpoenas in connection with out-of-state proceedings involving, assisting, aiding or abetting an individual who performs, assists, or otherwise performs a legal abortion in California. (watch out Sec. 11, Penal Code § 13778.2(c)(2).)

Third, AB 2091 prohibits state and local courts from compelling an abortionist to identify or provide information if the request is based on an out-of-state law that violates abortion rights. Foreign Penal Civil Action. This protection also applies to administrative, legislative and other governmental processes. (watch out Sec. 6, Health Code 123466(b).)

New restrictions on California government agencies

Government agencies can be a resource for information about reproductive and transgender health care. For example, police may know who has traveled to a health facility, and government agencies may identify who received what type of care. Therefore, the bills create two new restrictions on the disclosure of health care information by California government agencies.

First, AB 1242 and SB 107 prohibit all state and local government agencies in California, and their employees, from providing information to any individual or out-of-state agency:

Third, AB 2091 prohibits prison staff from providing medical information about an inmate’s abortion if the request is based on an out-of-state law that interferes with California’s abortion rights or a foreign penalty civil action. (watch out Sec. 8, Penal Code § 3408(r).)

New restrictions on communication services in California

Finally, AB 1242 provides new protections to protect people from disclosure requests made to the type of organization that holds their information. These are California corporations that provide electronic communications services and corporations with principal offices in California. In California, they must not provide “records, information, facilities, or assistance” to respond to an out-of-state legal process (such as a warrant or other court order) related to a prohibited violation. (watch out Sec. 9, Penal Code 1546.5(a).) The California Attorney General may enforce this law. (watch out Sec. 9, Penal Code 1546.5(b).) but unless the corporation “knows or should have known” of legal process related to the prohibited violation, covered corporations will not take any action in response to such legal process. (watch out Sec. 9, Penal Code 1546.5(c).)

Next steps

These three new California laws—AB 1242, AB 2091, and SB 107—are strong reproductive and transgender health information privacy protections. Other pro-trans and pro-trans states should pass similar laws.

More work remains in California. After these important new laws take effect, we can expect that anti-choice sheriffs and bounty hunters will continue to seek abortion-related information in the Golden State. So do authorities outside the state to penalize parents who allow their children to receive gender-affirming health care. California policymakers must be proactive and enact new laws as needed. For example, an existing one California lawbased on another The ULC model, allowed state courts to order a resident to travel out of state to testify in a criminal proceeding. This law may require exemptions for abortion-related and trans-related information. California officials should identify efforts with companies in anti-choice and anti-trans states to use whatever tools they have to circumvent and respond to these new protections.