American Civil Liberties Union v. Miller
| American Civil Liberties Union v. Miller | |
|---|---|
| Case Title | American Civil Liberties Union v. Miller |
| Date | |
| Appealed | |
| Personal Information | |
| Taxonomy | |
| Link to Ruling | |
| Country/Jurisdiction | United States |
| State or Province | |
| Regulatory Bodies | |
| Decided | Yes |
| Arbitrator | United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| Related Laws | Constitution - Amendment I |
Short Summary
ACLU v. Zell Miller was a court case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in 1997 between the ACLU, along with other parties, and then Georgia governor, Zell Miller. This case established the right to privacy of internet users and guaranteed the protection of basic rights while on the internet. It was established that the government does not have oversight or authority over the internet and thus cannot necessarily make mandates for it.
Background
The Georgia General Assembly passed legislation that eliminated rights to privacy when using the internet in the State of Georgia. Plaintiffs, ACLU, bring this action for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging the constitutionality of Act No. 1029, Ga. Laws 1996, p. 1505, codified at O.C.G.A. § 16-9-93.1.
The plaintiffs reminded the court that no one owns the internet, since it is a decentralized medium of communication between several parties and persons around the world. To impose this regulation would therefore be overstepping the scope of Georgia law, since the state did not have authority over the entity of the internet.The parties vigorously dispute the scope of the act. Plaintiffs, a group of individuals and organization members who communicate over the internet, interpret it as imposing unconstitutional content-based restrictions on their right to communicate anonymously and pseudonymously over the internet, as well as on their right to use trade names, logos, and other graphics in a manner held to be constitutional in other contexts.
Defendants contend that the act prohibits a much narrower class of communications. They interpret it as forbidding only fraudulent transmissions or the appropriation of the identity of another person or entity for some improper purpose.
In addition, the forceful public disclosure of internet users was said to violate basic civil liberties to privacy and would be revealing sensitive information of users who did not wish to make their identities public. The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality to this act in its entirety. The defendant sought dismissal but was denied this motion.
After the plaintiff could prove likelihood of success of merits, substantial threat of irreparable injury, balance of hardships, and the promotion of the public interest, the court awarded the plaintiff with a preliminary injunction. Thus, the defendant was enjoined from enforcing the newly passed act and was forced to revoke it.
Decision
Act No. 1029, Ga. Laws 1996 was found to be unconstitutional and in violation of the Bill of Rights.