News & Commentary

You may not realize this, but the government and corporations regularly access our personal, private information – and even that of our children – without our knowledge or consent, and on a daily basis. They use it for profit. They use it to track our location. That’s right—it’s hard to believe, but it’s true.These regular incursions into our privacy are made easier by the fact that our laws have failed to keep up with new technologies. As technology has advanced, our digital privacy laws remain stuck in the digital Dark Ages. This means that emails, text messages, location information and all of our digital data have been open to warrantless police surveillance.Virginia’s Sen. Chap Petersen (D-Fairfax) and Del. Mark Dudenhefer (R-Stafford), along with chief House co-patron Del. Rich Anderson (R-Woodbridge), have taken a critical step forward to ensure Virginians are no longer vulnerable to such government overreach. The Virginia Electronic Privacy Act (ECPA) would require law enforcement to obtain a warrant before accessing electronic information about our identities, where we go, who we know and what we do. This bill will provide reasonable privacy protections for our emails and other electronic information where federal law has failed to do so.Virginia residents should know that the government is working to protect their privacy, not violate it, and the majority of Americans across the country feel the same way. A 2014 study from the Pew Research Center found that that 75 percent of adults believe that their emails, text messages and location information are sensitive, and that 80 percent of adults feel Americans are rightly concerned about the government monitoring of Internet communications. Another recent poll found 90 percent of Americans want the next president of the United States to prioritize “protecting privacy so [Americans] have more control over our personal information.”Such widespread, nationwide support reinforces what we already know: Privacy issues transcend party lines. Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and progressives alike all want to be in control of their own privacy.Senator Petersen, Delegate Dudenhefer and Delegate Anderson join a diverse bipartisan coalition of elected officials and citizens from sixteen states and the District of Columbia who have come together to tell the nation they care about digital privacy and are willing to fight for it. The message from these states is clear: Where Congress is unwilling or unable to act to protect Americans’ privacy, or takes actions that are insufficient, the states are more than willing to step up and fill the void.Other states such as California, Colorado, Maine, Texas and Utah have already passed laws similar to Virginia’s ECPA. It doesn’t matter if you’re a blue or red state—people from all political stripes believe that using stealthy, secret or concealed technologies to access our data without our knowledge or consent is simply not an acceptable practice. Without a warrant, or our express permission, government simply shouldn’t be searching through our private information.The guiding principle for privacy in the United States in 2016 is the same as it was in 1776: “Get a warrant, get permission, or get out.”

Virginia is nearing its first execution in three years. On Oct. 1, the Commonwealth is scheduled to execute Alfredo Prieto. If the execution of Mr. Prieto goes ahead as scheduled, the Commonwealth will show that the machinery of death trumps government transparency, accountability, and the U.S. Constitution.

This month is bookended by reminders of police abuse. Last Sunday marked one year since a police officer shot and killed Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri and August 29 will mark the two-year anniversary of a police shooting that occurred much closer to home – the shooting of John Geer by a Fairfax County police officer. In both cases, the men were unarmed. And, in both cases law enforcement and elected officials responded with an official wall of silence.In our society, we too often wait to consider and make needed reforms until after a horrible event triggers a public outcry. Ferguson and Fairfax County are sad examples of this reform model. As we wrote earlier this week, the police abuses in Ferguson triggered some positive reforms, including new restrictions placed on the transfer of military equipment from the federal government to state and local law enforcement. These were reforms for which we’d advocated previously, but which failed to gain traction until Ferguson made them impossible to ignore. Fairfax County is also a place where advocates have long sought police reforms.  But, it took the inaction by the Fairfax County Policy Department (FCPD) in the wake of Mr. Greer’s death and federal concerns about how the investigation was handled for the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors to establish a commission to review the FCPD’s policies and practices and recommend changes to ensure a culture of public trust between the FCPD and the community. The high bar set to trigger reform opportunities makes it even more important that we push the commission to recommend real reforms now!The establishment of the police review commission in Fairfax, referred to officially as the Ad Hoc Police Practices Review Commission, is an important step in restoring civilian authority and oversight over policing in the County, a step that is also essential to restoring public trust in the FCPD. The commission is made up of a diverse group of stakeholders, including community advocates, law enforcement, and academics and will offer its recommendations to the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors this fall. The substance of these recommendations is still undecided. It’s up to us to ensure that they are rooted in the concepts and values of accountability, transparency, constitutional policing and respect for the sanctity of human life – otherwise we risk recommendations that merely rubber stamp the policies and practices that led us here in the first place.We can all make our voice heard in this process. You can check the Police Commission meeting schedule or the committee and subcommittee webpage to see when and where the commission and its subcommittees will meet and whether the agenda will include a public comment period where you can add your voice. The community’s input matters – your voice can make a difference.Not sure what to say? Here is what we’re asking the commission to recommend. Our recommendations are based on the belief that law enforcement officers are guardians of the Constitution.These recommendations include:

 

(originally published by the Richmond Times Dispatch)

 

It’s a wrap. After four months of advocacy before the General Assembly and Governor’s office, we can finally report how Virginians’ rights fared during the 2015 General Assembly Session. We had some major victories, but also some disappointing losses.

In 2014 America, I should not be afraid of being the mother of an African American man; I should feel free to be very proud.  But the sad, angry, upsetting, and disappointing truth is I and, I imagine, many other mothers, are afraid for our sons and grandsons because we are afraid of law enforcement and how they’ll be treated.

Today we sent a letter to members of the Virginia State Crime Commission, urging them not to criminalize the act of sexting. The creation of a new misdemeanor offense is the wrong way to address the growing trend of sexting. This behavior should be addressed by parents and educators, not prosecutors and judges.Sexting is an issue for teens and their parents nationwide. At least one study says a majority of teenagers have done it. Sexting is the sending of nude or explicit photos, often self-portraits, from one person to another.We are concerned about the Commonwealth’s willingness to introduce more kids into the school-to-prison pipeline. The evidence is clear that even one interaction with the juvenile justice system makes a child more likely to reoffend. A child who spends time in juvenile detention is also more likely to spend time in prison as an adult. And unfortunately, criminal laws tend to ensnare kids of color at disproportionate rates. Moreover, while criminal laws may deter adults from undesirable behavior, criminal laws do not have the same effect on children, who because of their immaturity are less able to understand the consequences of breaking the law.There are also constitutional concerns with a new sexting offense. The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized the fundamental right of parents to raise children without unnecessary intrusion by the state. The Court has also recognized that children have the right to express themselves. And while we may not like that kids send nude images to each other, attempts to criminalize that behavior may violate the First Amendment.The enactment of a new criminal offense for sexting also threatens to draw limited law enforcement and judicial resources away from their proper focus on violent offenders. Every hour police and courts spend investigating a naked picture taken by one teen and sent to another is an hour not spent dealing with rapes, robberies, and murders.In our letter, we urge the Crime Commission not to recommend the creation of a new sexting misdemeanor offense in the Commonwealth. Such a crime would infringe on constitutional rights, fail to correct undesired behavior, and pull resources away from more important public safety goals. Instead of recommending that this behavior be criminalized, the Crime Commission should go on record encouraging police and prosecutors to leave regulation of and sanctions for this kind of teen behavior to parents and school officials.