@lesliereagan8 (author of "When Abortion Was a Crime") discusses how 1900s law required private actors -- doctors, hospitals -- to cooperate with coroners and police in the surveillance of women. #ColorOfSurveillance
@ReproRose of @JanesDueProcess describes what happens to a young person seeking abortion care in a state like Texas. Abortion rates dropped by 75% for teens in Texas after the law went into effect. #ColorOfSurveillance
All communications are encrypted, phone numbers aren't shown -- even when people are just seeking information. They worked with Digital Defense Fund on using technology to protect confidentiality. #ColorOfSurveillance
@ReproRose notes the problems with the private enforcement section of Texas' SB-8 -- clinics closing for fear of civil lawsuits.
@lesliereagan8: "It's horrible." Notes pressures on staff as well as doctors, civil duty to report and surveill and judge. #ColorOfSurveillance
@lesliereagan8 Ends on a (relatively) hopeful note. Talks about the long history of resistance. Despite the horrible effects of criminalizing abortion, "These laws are not going to work. They never have worked." #ColorOfSurveillance
Some great perspectives from @Cyn_K on intersections between reproductive justice and Indigenous rights and sovereignty. @GeorgetownCPT has some good links here.
Khiara M. Bridges notes that a big change since 1970 (when Roe legalized abortion) is the increase in the number of incarcerated people -- including punishing pregnant people (especially Black women) for endangering their foetuses. #ColorOfSurveillance
Khiara M. Bridges "Roe's demise creates circumstances under which Black people will be over-represented on those who are exposed to prosecution for abortions."
Dr. Bridges is author of "Critical Race Theory: A Primer"
Kate from Digital Defense Fund, who provides digital security for the abortion access movement, talks about the importance of perspectives like Khiara's to identify the surveillance systems that actually put people at risk (and avoid "shiny object syndrome") #ColorOfSurveillance
Once people are reported for potentially seeking abortions, "mobile forensic extraction" -- seizing devices and extracting information like texts and google searches -- is frequently the next step. #ColorOfSurveillance
Tech people frequently try to come up with perfect technology stacks that keep abortions completely secret, but that's not realistic. People may not know that abortion is criminalized when they search for info. Many protections break down when targeted by law enforcement
@KateRoseBee makes a great point: don't surrender to the nihilism! We have a right to communicate with peopel we trust and get information. Inspired by "Our Data Bodies" project. #ColorOfSurveillance
Great question from @KendraSerra on data collection by governments, based on Dr. Bridges' "Reproducing Race" discussion of data collection about pregnant people.
Dr. Bridges: "Even standard medical information is now incriminating" #ColorOfSurveillance
When people withhold information from (for examples) social workers, that implies they're trying to hide something -- and makes them the subject of an investigation. "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." #ColorOfSurveillance
Closing again on a non-nihilist note, what gives people hope?
Dr. Bridges: People insisting on their autonomy is an act of resistance, it should be acknowledged. And we're phrasing the discussion in terms of Reproductive Justice - not just abortion. #ColorOfSurveillance
@KateRoseBee the people who inspire me the most are the people who are helping abortion seekers, working to provide funds, the community of storytellers. The culture of security is phenomenal, broad community of people saying "you don't have to share that" #ColorOfSurveillance
@KateRoseBee picture channels with disappearing messages, like Signal, makes it easier to speak freely. Also broader context: working with trans people, sex workers ... "I can see the pathways for bodily autonomy coming together as a movement." #ColorOfSurveillance
After an outstanding segment of reflections, @KendraSerra wraps things up, stressing the "through line" of eugenics, echoing Dr. Bridges' focus Reproductive Justice. #ColorOfSurveillance
@KendraSerra highlights the role of non-governmental, non-police parties as the ones who set off the chain -- often in response to pressure to share information.
What does it mean to have privilege to refuse? How to use that privilege? #ColorOfSurveillance
@KendraSerra wears the shirt "privacy as a human right". Since the Dobbs leak, more and more people are stopping them on the street to discuss. Easy to be cynical, but with the end of Role privacy *matters* to a lot more people. #ColorOfSurveillance
Follow the words of @prisonculture: "Let this radicalize you!"
Relates back go Dr. Bridges article on Race, Pregnancy and the Opioid Epidemic. #ColorOfSurveillance
@KendraSerra highlights the opportunity to create a path that benefits all those who have been targeted by surveillance -- topics have been discussed in past #ColorOfSurveillance workshops. "All that remains to do is the work. And if we're not going to do it, who will?"
@Cyn_K: "This is not the end". They'll post a reading list, some recordings, and continue conversations.
And that wraps up #ColorOfSurveillance ... great work by all, so much to think about!
@MindingPrivacy, Dr. Khiara Bridges' answer in response to a #ColorOfSurveillance question about what gives her hope was very aligned with yours: we're phrasing the discussion in terms of Reproductive Justice.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@DanielSolove: we're in the "golden age of privacy law", at least in terms of the number of laws. He's been critical of many of them. Let's discuss!
@ariezrawaldman's concerns: 1) laws rely too much on goodwill and processes of regulated entities. 2) laws focus on individual rights. ineffective at solving social problems, sets bad norms. "Notice and consent" puts enforcement on us, ditto for transparancy and correction
Starting at 9:30, it's the King County Council "Committee of the Whole" meeting, with a likely vote on an ordinance to ban government use of facial recognition!
And here's a short news story from @KIRO7Seattle on testimony from two weeks ago. Yep, that's me in the video, noting that "facial recognition technology poses unprecedented privacy, civil liberties, and equity concerns."
Most of the speakers are testifying CON as well, with only @joejerome and @mxmahoney5 testifying PRO.
Both of their orgs endorsed the latest version of SB 5062, with a very limited private right of action and some other fixes that don't address civil rights' groups demands.
Veena Dubal makes a great point in "SF Was Right to Ban Facial Recognition":
"Even in an imaginary future where algorithmic discrimination does not exist, facial recognition software simply cannot de-bias the practice and impact of state surveillance."
Up early today to head down to Olympia for the hearing on #SB6281, the (very bad) Washington Privacy Act. Hopefully, I'll be live-tweeting on this thread.
Here's a chart from @ACLU_WA highlighting just some of the problems with SB6281.
@ACLU_WA And if you're in Washington State, please let ask your legislators to OPPOSE SB6281 in its current form.