A California law that requires all cellphone owners to unlock their devices when their devices are in use is a new twist on the law that sets out how to enforce privacy protections.
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), was introduced last week by a bipartisan group of senators including Sens.
Richard Blumenthal (D.
Conn.), Tom Carper (D.-Del.), Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.), and Cory Booker (D, N.J.).
The law has a broad scope and a chance to reshape the way the technology industry handles the issue of protecting people’s personal data.
Its provisions, which would require phones to be unlocked at all times when the device is used, have already led to a number of court challenges, with privacy advocates vowing to use the new law as a template for privacy law reform in the United States.
It has already been used to force Apple to unlock the iPhone of one of its customers, forcing Facebook to turn over the Facebook user’s information to police in Canada, and forcing Samsung to provide the owner of the Galaxy S6 smartphone in an international court to unlock it.
The law, which has been criticized by privacy advocates and some consumer groups, was intended to prevent data breaches that can cause personal information to be exposed to hackers, and it would also allow the government to compel companies to unlock devices.
But the new language was drafted by a coalition of consumer groups who oppose unlocking in some cases, and the bill has drawn the ire of the tech industry, which fears the law will force companies to make personal information available to hackers.
“This is a bill that’s not about cybersecurity,” said Sam Yagan, a senior policy counsel at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which supports a number other privacy and security issues, including the bill’s requirement that companies make data available to the government.
“This is about forcing companies to share their customers’ private data in a way that is completely outside the protections of their customer agreement, and that will lead to a whole new set of problems.”
The bill has been referred to the Senate Intelligence Committee, where its authors have been meeting for more than a week.
The committee is scheduled to vote on the bill on Tuesday, and if it passes, it would then move on to the full Senate.
The bill is expected to be approved by the full chamber before Christmas.
The legislation is expected in a bipartisan conference committee on Dec. 18, but Democrats and Republicans have been reluctant to support the bill.
“There is no reason that we shouldn’t be using these tools that are already there,” said Cory Booker, who leads the progressive group The People’s Budget.
“We can’t continue to make it harder for Americans to use their phones.”
Critics say the bill is an attack on Americans’ privacy and a new version of the Faraday law that will be used to shut down encryption and impose new surveillance rules.
The FBI, for example, has sued Apple and other companies over the use of encryption.
The new legislation also would require companies to collect information about their users’ calls and texts, but that information would only be used for law enforcement purposes, and would not be shared with the government or with third parties.
The law would also give the government a blanket power to seize phones that are used in crimes and fraud, and could require companies like Samsung to store data on the phones for six months.
The legislation also allows the government, through a warrant, to access encrypted messages and data from phones connected to a suspect in criminal or terrorism investigations, unless a judge determines that the data is relevant to a criminal investigation or is likely to help investigators identify suspects.
But some privacy advocates say the law would allow the NSA to hack into the phone of a U.S. citizen and potentially intercept their phone calls.
And while the law’s provisions on encryption would give the FBI and other law enforcement agencies access to encrypted devices, it does not require that they also turn over all their communications to the company, or turn over any data that may be linked to them.
The proposal has also drawn criticism from tech companies, which say it will give the authorities a backdoor into their customers devices and allow them to access user data without any judicial oversight.
Apple has fought back against criticism over the bill, saying it will allow law enforcement to tap into the private conversations of its users.
“The bill would not prevent law enforcement from accessing the contents of our phones, and we will vigorously defend our customers’ privacy,” the company said in a statement.
Harris’ bill would also prohibit the FBI from seizing phones from a person suspected of being involved in criminal activity unless the government shows a good faith belief that the phone is connected to terrorism, the FBI said.
The measure would also ban the FBI, through an order from a judge, from using the phone to seize the phone from a suspect or a foreign national without a warrant.
But privacy advocates said that the law is broad enough to give law enforcement the