Microsoft Corp. v. United States | |
---|---|
Argued February 27, 2018 Decided April 17, 2018 | |
Full case name | United States v. Microsoft Corp. |
Docket no. | 17-2 |
Citations | 584 U.S. ___ (more) 138 S.Ct. 1186 |
Case history | |
Prior | Microsoft Corp. v. United States, S.D.N.Y. reversed, warrant quashed, and civil contempt ruling vacated (2nd Cir. 2016); cert. granted (S. Ct. 2018) |
Holding | |
Second Circuit vacated and remanded after the controversy was mooted by passage of the CLOUD Act (March 2018). | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Per curiam | |
Laws applied | |
|
Microsoft Corp. v. United States | |
---|---|
Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit |
Full case name | In the Matter of a Warrant to Search a Certain E‐Mail Account Controlled and Maintained by Microsoft Corporation |
Argued | September 9, 2015 |
Decided | July 14, 2016 |
Case history | |
Subsequent history | Vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court as United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. 17-2, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), after the controversy was mooted by passage of the CLOUD Act (March 2018) |
Holding | |
Reversed. Warrant quashed and civil contempt ruling vacated | |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Susan L. Carney, Gerard E. Lynch, Victor A. Bolden (District Judge) |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Carney, Bolden |
Concurrence | Lynch |
Laws applied | |
Stored Communications Act of 1986 |
Microsoft Corp. v. United States, known on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court as United States v. Microsoft Corp., 584 U.S. ___, 138 S. Ct. 1186 (2018), was a data privacy case involving the extraterritoriality of law enforcement seeking electronic data under the 1986 Stored Communications Act (SCA), Title II of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), in light of modern computing and Internet technologies such as data centers and cloud storage.
In 2013, Microsoft challenged a warrant by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to turn over emails of a target account stored in Ireland, arguing that a warrant issued under Section 2703 of the Stored Communications Act could not compel American companies to produce data stored in servers outside the United States. Microsoft initially lost in the Southern District of New York, with the judge stating that the nature of the Stored Communication Act warrant, as passed in 1986, was not subject to territorial restrictions. Microsoft appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, who found in favor of Microsoft by 2016 and invalidated the warrant. In response, the United States Department of Justice appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, which decided to hear the appeal.
While the case was pending in the Supreme Court, Congress passed the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act (CLOUD Act), which amended the SCA to resolve concerns from the government and Microsoft related to the initial warrant. The Supreme Court, following agreement from both the government and Microsoft, determined the passage of the CLOUD Act and a new warrant for the data filed under it made the case moot and vacated the Second Circuit's decision.