On June 3, 2021, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in
Van Buren v. United States, narrowing the scope of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). In resolving a circuit split in favor of a limited interpretation of the phrase “exceeds authorized access,” the Court held that the criminal provisions of the CFAA do not apply to individuals who have authorized access to computer information, but access that information for a reason that is not permitted. The Court’s ruling curtails the federal government’s ability to charge individuals with computer fraud, including the criminalization of commonplace and potentially harmless conduct, such as sending a personal email through a work computer when a company’s policy precludes such use of the computer system.
In United States v. Van Buren, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split over whether a person who is authorized to access information on a computer for certain purposes
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Supreme Court Narrows Federal Anti-Hacking Law to Exclude Enforcement Against Those Who Use Otherwise Authorized Access for Improper Purpose
There is a well-worn legal maxim that hard cases make bad law. In deciding
Van Buren v. United States today, the Supreme Court was faced with the opposite problem: bad laws[i] make hard cases. Specifically, in a 6-3 decision, the Court found that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ( CFAA ) does not extend to an individual s accessing information over the internet for an improper purpose, so long as the individual would be entitled to access for a proper purpose. There s no question that interpreting the opaquely-worded CFAA forced the Court to choose between two bad options, with a parade of horribles on both sides; it chose the option that clearly decriminalizes everyday behavior (but also would allow abusive use of access that individuals have solely for work purposes).
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
The U.S. Supreme Court divided along unusual lines Thursday to reverse the conviction of a police sergeant for using his police car computer to access and then sell a license plate number in exchange for $5,000.
The vote was 6-to-3, with the court s newest justice Amy Coney Barrett writing the majority opinion for herself, liberal justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and conservative justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. The dissenters were Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Chief Justice John Roberts.
At issue was the interpretation of the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, a federal law that makes it a crime for an individual to exceed authorized access to a computer in order to obtain information he is not entitled so to obtain.
(Image courtesy of Georgia Department of Motor Vehicles via Courthouse News)
WASHINGTON (CN) A Georgia police sergeant who took a bribe to access license plate information prevailed at the Supreme Court, overturning his conviction under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
The case stems from a sting operation that the FBI had arranged back in 2015 after hearing a recording that captured police Sergeant Nathan Van Buren asking Andrew Albo, a civilian known to the department, for a personal loan. To see how far Van Buren would go, agents directed Albo to offer the sergeant $5,000 if he would access the police department’s license plate database.