Analysing the EU Data Privacy Implications Resulting From Executive Order 14086: A Legal Perspective
Abstract
The exchange of personal data between the EU and the USA has sparked intense debates and contentious discussions. This heightened attention can be attributed to significant disparities in data privacy regulations between the two regions, as well as mounting concerns surrounding the potential misuse of personal information by U.S. companies and government entities. In response to these concerns, the EU implemented the GDPR in 2018, which introduced stringent regulations aimed at safeguarding data privacy. Additionally, the GDPR imposed restrictions on the transfer of personal data to countries outside the EU that lack comparable data protection measures. One of the prominent legal challenges in this context relates to concerns over the adequacy of data protection in the USA, particularly in light of U.S. surveillance programs and the potential for government access to personal data.
Povzetek
Izmenjava osebnih podatkov med EU in ZDA je sprožila intenzivne razprave. To povečano pozornost je mogoče pripisati velikim razlikam v predpisih o varstvu podatkov med obema regijama, pa tudi vse večji zaskrbljenosti glede morebitne zlorabe osebnih podatkov s strani ameriških podjetij in vladnih organov. Kot odgovor na te pomisleke je EU leta 2018 uvedla uredbo GDPR, s katero so bili uvedeni strogi predpisi, namenjeni varovanju zasebnosti podatkov. Poleg tega je uredba GDPR uvedla omejitve za prenos osebnih podatkov v države zunaj EU, ki nimajo primerljivih ukrepov za varstvo podatkov. Eden od vidnejših pravnih izzivov v tem okviru je povezan s pomisleki glede ustreznosti varstva podatkov v ZDA, zlasti v luči ameriških programov nadzora in možnosti vladnega dostopa do osebnih podatkov.
Downloads
References
Determan, L. (2023). The EU – US data privacy framework and the impact on companies in the EEA and USA compared to other international data transfer mechanisms. Journal of Data protection & Privacy, 6(2), pp 120-134.
Dimović Z. (2023). Privacy and Data Protection Concerns in the Regulatory Framework of Slovenian Energy Law. LeXonomica, 15(1), pp. 53-76.
Gerke, S. (2023). Privacy Shield 2.0: A New Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework Privacy Shield 2.0: A New Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework Between the European Union and the United States. Cordozo Law Review, 45(2), pp. 351-403.
Halabi, S.F. (2022). Executive authority under the U.S. constitution to enter a pandemic treaty or other international agreement. Harward international law journal online, 63/2022, pp 1-23.
Jackson, V.C. (2015). Constitutional Law in an age of Proportionality. The Yale law journal, pp. 3094-3193.
Joel, A. (2023). Necessity, proportionality and Executive order 14086. Digital commons at American University Washington College of law, pp. 1-31.
Lindsay, D. (2018). The role of proportionality in accessing Trans-Atlantic flows of personal data. Cambridge University press, pp 49-84.
Marconi, F. (2023). The EU–US Data Protection Framework: Balancing Economic, Security and Privacy Considerations. Istituto Affari Internazionali commentaries 23(46), pp 1-7.
McCabe, D. 2022. U.S. and European leaders reach deal on trans-Atlantic data privacy. The New York Times.
Mildebrath, H.A. (2022). Reaching the EU-US Data Privacy Framework: First reactions to Executive Order 14086. European Parliamentary Research Service. PE 739.261, pp 1-12.
Propp, K. (2023). More than adequate: New directions in International Data Transfer Governance. Atlantic council, Europe Center, pp 1-18.
Reinfeld, Y. (2024). The European Union as a normative power: The role of the CJEU. Routhledge, New York.
Rubinstein, I., (2022). EU Privacy Law and U.S. Surveillance: Solving the Problem of Transatlantic Data Transfers. Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development, 20(1), pp 58-69.
Schwartz, P.M. (2013). The EU-U.S. privacy collision: A turn to institutes and procedures. Harward Law Review, 126(7), pp 1966-2009.
Zemer, L. (2021). European Union law as foreign law. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational law, 54(3), pp 677-692.
