Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Warrants

Fourth Amendment Protections for Emails Inch Forward in Congress

Legislation would require warrants for old communications.

Scott Shackford | 2.4.2016 11:20 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Gaemau | Dreamstime.com
(Gaemau | Dreamstime.com)
You'll need somebody who can read Russian to get through the spam.
Credit: Gaemau | Dreamstime.com

There is a big, huge gap in your Fourth Amendment protection against government searches without a warrant that goes all the way back three decades. That's when Congress passed the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, which like many laws, somehow managed to do the opposite of what it is named. This was not necessarily on purpose (for once), but rather a failure to predict how email and digital communications would ultimately become Americans' primary method of talking to each other.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act treats all emails stored by a third party provider as "abandoned" after 180 days and allows for law enforcement agencies to gain access to the contents without having to get a warrant. At the time, third party providers weren't actually storing emails for long periods. Now they are.

Starting in 2013, a bipartisan coalition of privacy-oriented members of Congress have been attempting to get legislation passed to fix gaps in Fourth Amendment protections for electronic communications. Obviously it hasn't happened yet, but this week one bill, the Email Protection Act, has been given clearance to take a step forward. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Virginia) announced this week that the Email Protection Act will go through the "markup" phase in March, which would allow it to move forward to a possible floor vote.

The House legislation, sponsored by Reps. Kevin Yoder (R-Kentucky) and Jared Polis (D-Colorado), is very popular among members of Congress. It has 308 co-sponsors. The Senate's version of the bill, sponsored by Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) made it through the Senate's Judiciary Committee last year but has not had a floor vote.

Yoder and Polis have both put out statements indicating hope that the legislation will get through the markup and out to the House floor for a vote. Polis, whose pre-congressional career revolved around tech commerce startups, sent out a statement:

"The last time our email privacy laws were updated, I was a sixth-grader and playing computer games meant inserting a floppy disk into an Apple II. As a result of Congress's failure to keep pace with technology, every American is at risk of having their emails warrantlessly searched by government agencies. I'm thrilled the Judiciary Committee will finally markup the Email Privacy Act, so that we can finally update this archaic law and ensure that Americans' Fourth Amendment rights are protected whether they're communicating through email, on the phone, or through the mail. I'm confident that once the bill is allowed to proceed to the House floor, it will pass with overwhelming support from both parties."

There are some potential problems, though. Law enforcement officials and the Department of Justice want the new law to have an exception to force Internet companies to turn over customer data in the event of an "emergency" without having to get a warrant first. The Hill notes that Google and privacy experts say the exception isn't necessary and could bring privacy and security problems, and a Google representative pointed out that some officials will declare that it's an emergency simply because they don't want to have to deal with the hassle of getting a legitimate warrant. And agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission, who don't have warrant authorities, want carve-outs so that they can get access to third-party communication data from Internet providers.

Goodlatte claims to be supportive of the emergency exemption at least, so we'll have to keep an eye out on what happens to the text of the Email Protection Act once it hits the markup session in March.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Republicans Vow to Hunt Down Flint Emergency Manager Responsible for 'Government-Made Catastrophe'

Scott Shackford is a policy research editor at Reason Foundation.

WarrantsFourth AmendmentPrivacyInternetCongress
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (34)

Latest

Almost a Year After It Launched, DOGE's Legacy Is Mixed

Christian Britschgi | From the January 2026 issue

Americans Need More and Better 'Third Places.' User Fees Can Help.

C. Jarrett Dieterle and Shawn Regan | 12.13.2025 7:00 AM

Nepal's Socialist Government Banned Social Media, So Activists Plotted a Revolution—on Discord.

Matthew Petti | From the January 2026 issue

The Feds' 'Worst of the Worst' Database Is Stuffed with Nonviolent Offenders. Who Exactly Is ICE Arresting?

Autumn Billings | 12.12.2025 6:00 PM

Donald Trump Tries To Override State AI Regulations via Executive Order

Jack Nicastro | 12.12.2025 5:38 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks