About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


97 Wash. Univ. L. Rev. Online 1 (2019)

handle is hein.journals/wshuvylw97 and id is 1 raw text is: Washington University Law Review Online VOLUME 97 2019 FREE THE DATA! THE SCRAMBLE TO ACCESS DATA IN LIGHT OF SCHREMS I & II CHARLOTTE YOUNG Maximillian Schrems was a PhD student in Austria when he decided to participate in a study abroad program with Santa Clara University. While Schrems was at Santa Clara, Ed Palmari, Facebook's privacy lawyer, spoke to his class. It was during this lecture that Schrems received the ammunition that he needed to challenge the legitimacy of EU-U.S. data transfers. Based on Palmari's presentation, Schrems believed that Facebook lacked complicity of the EU's privacy regulations. Upon his return to the EU, Schrems took what he learned from Palmari and embarked on litigation that has challenged the way the U.S. treats data privacy. Schrems's actions have forced many companies to drastically amend their current business practices regarding U.S. data transfers from overseas locations. What started with a harmless study abroad presentation quickly spawned, arguably, the most influential privacy based litigation for US corporations. I. THE DIRECTIVE: THE MECHANISM THAT REGULATES FOR EU-US DATA TRANSFERS The U.S. and the EU view privacy differently: in the EU, there is a fundamental right to privacy; whereas, in the U.S., the right to privacy is far less structured.1 The EU's broad fundamental right to privacy also covers 1. The U.S. Supreme Court has failed to take any concrete position on such a right. The Supreme Court case, Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), was the first time the United States recognized a right to privacy. However, Justice White, most famously, grounded his decision in certain I