Unraveling The American Data Privacy Patchwork: Will the American Privacy Rights Act Succeed?
As the focus on protecting personal data continues to grow with the ever-widening adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, exponential increases in the number and breadth of data breaches, and growing awareness of the risk posed by data brokers, the time appears right for a U.S. federal data privacy regulation to succeed in Congress. But is the new American Privacy Rights Act that regulation?
May 09, 2024 at 02:43 PM
12 minute read
What You Need to Know
- The patchwork of data privacy laws in the U.S. has created significant legal challenges for companies doing business nationwide.
- With Congress taking up the new American Privacy Rights Act, those challenges may soon abate.
- Drawing on data privacy and protection concepts from international regulations and state comprehensive data privacy laws, the APRA creates a unique law that attempts to address contemporary privacy concerns while simultaneously anticipating future technologies.
There are currently 16 states that have enacted individual comprehensive data privacy laws to protect their residents. With approximately 40% of the U.S. population residing in those states, the patchwork of data privacy laws in the U.S. has created significant legal challenges for companies doing business nationwide. However, with Congress taking up the new American Privacy Rights Act (APRA), those challenges may soon abate.
Introduced by Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), who chairs the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, the APRA is unique in the current legislative environment in that it is both bi-partisan and bi-cameral. The two sponsors of the APRA hail from Washington State, which is one of the states that have been laboring for years to pass a comprehensive data privacy law in the absence of a federal regulation. With almost one-third of US states slated to have individual comprehensive data privacy laws in effect by 2026, states and federal regulators are continuously adding to the tapestry.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Be Prepared and Practice': Paul Hastings' Michelle Reed Breaks Down Firm's First SEC Cybersecurity Incident Disclosure Report
South Carolina Physicians Challenge Abortion Ban Under Religious Freedom Claims
TikTok Hit With California Class Action for Allegedly Mining Children's Data Without Parental Consent
Apple Agrees to Pay $95 Million Settlement in Siri Voice Assistant Privacy Class Action
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Can a Law Firm Institutionalize Its Culture? Boies Schiller’s New Chairman Will Try
- 2Full 8th Circuit Hears First Amendment Challenge to School District’s ‘Equity Training’
- 3Exploring Generative AI’s Impact on Intellectual Property
- 4Training Lawyers in AI and Using AI to Boost Training
- 5EB-5 Rebounds After a Rocky Year: Challenges of 2024 Lay Groundwork for a Booming 2025
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250