The CPPA Board voted unanimously today to oppose as currently drafted H.R. 8152 (#ADPPA), proposed federal privacy legislation that seeks to significantly weaken Californians’ privacy protections by pre-empting the California Consumer Privacy Act and other state privacy laws. 
The Board also voted to oppose any bill that similarly threatens crucial privacy protections for Californians but, via a third motion, left room for the Agency to support federal privacy legislation that provides a “true floor” that allows states to implement stronger protections
#ADPPA was advanced by @EnergyCommerce Jul 20, 2022 but @CAgovernor @rendon63rd & @AGRobBonta all submitted letters critical of the broad preemption language in the bill
While #ADPPA would extend privacy rights to other states, it would be at the expense of Californian’s rights.
While #ADPPA would extend privacy rights to other states, it would be at the expense of Californian’s rights.
#ADDPA would weaken:
1) CCPA’s constitutionally-protected “floor” for privacy protections
2) CA ability to strengthen the law in the future
3) CPPAs ability to protect Californians’ privacy rights under CCPA
More details available in the staff memo: cppa.ca.gov/meetings/mater…
1) CCPA’s constitutionally-protected “floor” for privacy protections
2) CA ability to strengthen the law in the future
3) CPPAs ability to protect Californians’ privacy rights under CCPA
More details available in the staff memo: cppa.ca.gov/meetings/mater…
Chairperson Urban:
“Californians for 50 years, at least, have enjoyed privacy rights in our Constitution and have continuously built on those.”
“we should take every step we can to make sure that Californians don't lose that protection.”
“Californians for 50 years, at least, have enjoyed privacy rights in our Constitution and have continuously built on those.”
“we should take every step we can to make sure that Californians don't lose that protection.”
Board Member Thompson:
“there is a false choice in this bill that....the strong rights of Californians (and others) have to be taken away in order to provide weaker rights federally.”
“We can have both. We can have a federal floor that enables states to continue to innovate”
“there is a false choice in this bill that....the strong rights of Californians (and others) have to be taken away in order to provide weaker rights federally.”
“We can have both. We can have a federal floor that enables states to continue to innovate”
Board Member Sierra:
“States are in the best position to really react and address to changes in technology.”
“There is room for federal legislation, but at the same time allowing the States to be able to address what is going to be very important.”
“States are in the best position to really react and address to changes in technology.”
“There is room for federal legislation, but at the same time allowing the States to be able to address what is going to be very important.”
Board Member De La Torre:
“Preemption to me doesn't really align with ensuring that Californians or, for that matter of residents of any state, enjoy the highest possible privacy protections.”
“This is particularly concerning to me in an era... where Roe has been repealed.“
“Preemption to me doesn't really align with ensuring that Californians or, for that matter of residents of any state, enjoy the highest possible privacy protections.”
“This is particularly concerning to me in an era... where Roe has been repealed.“
Board Member Le:
"Pre-emption would mean that California no longer have the right to opt out of automated decision making or to get meaningful information when an automated system profiles them or makes high stakes decisions around who has access to jobs, healthcare, credit…”
"Pre-emption would mean that California no longer have the right to opt out of automated decision making or to get meaningful information when an automated system profiles them or makes high stakes decisions around who has access to jobs, healthcare, credit…”
Board Member Le:
“While I am excited about the prospect of a national privacy law, I believe it does not need to come at the expense of the privacy rights we have here in California.”
“While I am excited about the prospect of a national privacy law, I believe it does not need to come at the expense of the privacy rights we have here in California.”
An archived video of the meeting is available at:
Contact: press@cppa.ca.gov
Contact: press@cppa.ca.gov
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
