SCOTUS Narrows CCFA Scope

Van Buren. He used his police computer to access a law enforcement database to obtain data about a license plate number owned by a potential undercover officer, in exchange for thousands of dollars. In an opinion delivered by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the majority ruled Van Buren didn’t violate CFAA: “This provision covers those who obtain information from particular areas in the computer -- such as files, folders, or databases -- to which their computer access does not extend. It does not cover those who, like Van Buren, have improper motives for obtaining information that is otherwise available to them.” Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Van Buren “had permission to retrieve license-plate information from a government database, but only for law enforcement purposes,” Thomas wrote. Van Buren exceeded “authorized access” in violation of the statute, Thomas added. Van Buren’s attorney Jeffrey Fisher emailed: “We’re very pleased with the Court’s opinion and are happy that the CFAA is now restricted to its proper reach.” DOJ didn't comment. SCOTUS recognized "the terribly written CFAA crossed the line by criminalizing everyday activities like using your work computer to read the news or send personal emails,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., in a statement. “Today's ruling helps rectify the damage caused by that reactionary law.” The American Civil Liberties Union also backed the majority opinion.