Virginia GOP kills bill protecting period-tracker data

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so clear why they don’t want this exempted, yet they’ll use that slippery slope argument to try to look legitimate

I hate these mfers to the depths of my soul

I hate the “moderates” more. Without the diligent spinelessness of “moderate” voters, none of this would be happening.

The Virginia Senate killed the bill, not Youngkin. It didn't even get to his desk, although if it did I am sure he would have vetoed it. But I don't think we have moderates to blame here.

Read the article. They killed it because of Youngkin's team's urging.

I did, but I think the Va Senate would have done it anyway. What we really need is to change the state senate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll play along and will email them to let them know when my period starts and stops and the same for my daughter.

haha. that would be hysterical if a lot of women did that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so clear why they don’t want this exempted, yet they’ll use that slippery slope argument to try to look legitimate

I hate these mfers to the depths of my soul

I hate the “moderates” more. Without the diligent spinelessness of “moderate” voters, none of this would be happening.

The Virginia Senate killed the bill, not Youngkin. It didn't even get to his desk, although if it did I am sure he would have vetoed it. But I don't think we have moderates to blame here.

Read the article. They killed it because of Youngkin's team's urging.

I did, but I think the Va Senate would have done it anyway. What we really need is to change the state senate.

The bill passed the senate but was tabled in the House after Youngkin’s flunkies testified against it using the argument that other info isn’t protected from police search warrant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll play along and will email them to let them know when my period starts and stops and the same for my daughter.

haha. that would be hysterical if a lot of women did that.

That’s how we all messed with that “report your teacher” hotline ;p

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so cringe that these people were up in arms about the government overreach of mask mandates, but they can't possibly support a limit on subpoenaing a woman's period info.

I think opponents need to really talk up creepy Youngkin and co wanting detailed info from tween and teen girls about their periods.

They're against "big government" in theory only.

Right? They are just vile POSs who will use any excuse they can to hurt others.

What happened to “amoral scum?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, this is on the moderates who bought the CRT BS hook, line and sinker.

I remember a woman on here during the Youngkin election talking about how she always voted Dem because of abortion, but abortion rights were safe and CRT was evil so go Youngkin all the way. I sometimes wonder what that person thinks today, if she was ever real in the first place and not just some propagandist.

[Anonymous]

Search warrants for menstrual flow trackers. I never thought I’d see the day.

These morons, I can put whatever I like in my own “story apps”, I can make up my flow and pretend I’m having cramps, too. These apps have absolutely no legal or medical relevance.

GOP=Taliban U.S. style

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's so cringe that these people were up in arms about the government overreach of mask mandates, but they can't possibly support a limit on subpoenaing a woman's period info.

I think opponents need to really talk up creepy Youngkin and co wanting detailed info from tween and teen girls about their periods.

They're against "big government" in theory only.

So true! If a SUBPOENA for someone’s MENSTRUAL FLOW tracker isn’t government overreach, I don’t know what is!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll play along and will email them to let them know when my period starts and stops and the same for my daughter.

Yes, please, every woman should spam them with detailed menstrual flow info. They are so effing ridiculous!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll play along and will email them to let them know when my period starts and stops and the same for my daughter.

Yes, please, every woman should spam them with detailed menstrual flow info. They are so effing ridiculous!

This is actually a good idea. Mobilizing my mom circle now.

[Anonymous]

Good Lord people. Stop getting your knickers in a wad about nothing.

From Mediaite - hardly a "right wing" source:


“Virginia governor clears path for ‘extreme’ bill allowing police to seek menstrual histories.” That false claim about Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin was tweeted out by The Guardian from four separate accounts to a total of 15 million followers this week.

The allegation traveled even further and wider than that, too. Comedienne Samantha Bee declared that she “would love nothing more than to take the Governor of Virginia through my menstrual history in the most vivid detail.” California governor Gavin Newsom mocked Youngkin as “a totally middle of the road guy that is fighting for access to your menstrual cycle information.”

But Youngkin never cleared any path for a bill to allow authorities to comb through women’s menstrual histories. In fact, no such bill was ever proposed in Old Dominion’s legislature, because it’s already allowed in all 50 states.

What the Guardian was attempting to describe was Youngkin’s opposition to legislation that would specifically bar police from accessing data about menstrual histories (usually stored on phone apps) that are presently obtainable through search warrants — a bill with no direct precedent in the United States.

Maggie Cleary, deputy secretary of public safety and homeland security in Youngkin’s administration noted that the Virginia bill “would be the very first of its kind that I’m aware of, in Virginia or anywhere, that would set a limit on what search warrants can do”

“Currently, any health information or any app information is available via search warrant. We believe that should continue to be the case,” said Cleary.

Since publication, The Guardian has shadow-edited its headline to better reflect the truth, but has notably failed to affix an editor’s to either the article or its tweets about the story — all of which remain up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/02/14/youngkin-menstrual-data-abortion-virginia/

S.B. 852, proposed by Sen. Barbara A. Favola (D-Arlington), would have prohibited search warrants from being issued for menstrual data stored on computers or other electronic devices. The measure sailed out of the Democratic-led Senate last week on a 31-9 vote, with every Democrat and half of the chamber’s 18 Republicans in support.

But a Republican-led House subcommittee voted along party lines Monday to “table” the bill — essentially killing it — after Maggie Cleary, Youngkin’s deputy secretary of public safety and homeland security, detailed the administration’s concerns that the measure could restrict subpoena powers.

“While the administration understands the importance of individuals’ privacy, we do oppose this bill,” she began. “This bill would be the very first of its kind that I’m aware of — in Virginia or anywhere — that would set a limit on what search warrants can do.

So in what cases would the government need a search warrant for health care information? Why can't this exception be stipulated unless you envision a purpose for needing it in the future? Obviously, abortion rights folks are concerned.

There's another bill working it's way through the legislative process that prevents selling that data, but it still leaves it open to subpoena.

The House has yet to act on another Senate bill, brought by Sen. Scott A. Surovell (D-Fairfax), that would prohibit the sale or dissemination of menstrual data to third parties without the consumer’s consent. Surovell said that measure, S.B. 1243, would not prevent disclosure to law enforcement.

Surovell’s bill would prevent the governor from extraditing someone who obtains legal abortion services in Virginia to a state that seeks to prevent its citizens from going out of state for procedures banned at home./QUOTE]

There are over 1000 comments on the wapo article, so clearly a lot of opinions out there.

You do realize that a search warrant in any other state in the US would also allow health information to be accessed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/02/14/youngkin-menstrual-data-abortion-virginia/

S.B. 852, proposed by Sen. Barbara A. Favola (D-Arlington), would have prohibited search warrants from being issued for menstrual data stored on computers or other electronic devices. The measure sailed out of the Democratic-led Senate last week on a 31-9 vote, with every Democrat and half of the chamber’s 18 Republicans in support.

But a Republican-led House subcommittee voted along party lines Monday to “table” the bill — essentially killing it — after Maggie Cleary, Youngkin’s deputy secretary of public safety and homeland security, detailed the administration’s concerns that the measure could restrict subpoena powers.

“While the administration understands the importance of individuals’ privacy, we do oppose this bill,” she began. “This bill would be the very first of its kind that I’m aware of — in Virginia or anywhere — that would set a limit on what search warrants can do.

So in what cases would the government need a search warrant for health care information? Why can't this exception be stipulated unless you envision a purpose for needing it in the future? Obviously, abortion rights folks are concerned.

There's another bill working it's way through the legislative process that prevents selling that data, but it still leaves it open to subpoena.

The House has yet to act on another Senate bill, brought by Sen. Scott A. Surovell (D-Fairfax), that would prohibit the sale or dissemination of menstrual data to third parties without the consumer’s consent. Surovell said that measure, S.B. 1243, would not prevent disclosure to law enforcement.

Surovell’s bill would prevent the governor from extraditing someone who obtains legal abortion services in Virginia to a state that seeks to prevent its citizens from going out of state for procedures banned at home./QUOTE]

There are over 1000 comments on the wapo article, so clearly a lot of opinions out there.

You do realize that a search warrant in any other state in the US would also allow health information to be accessed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll play along and will email them to let them know when my period starts and stops and the same for my daughter.

Yes, please, every woman should spam them with detailed menstrual flow info. They are so effing ridiculous!

This is actually a good idea. Mobilizing my mom circle now.

Go for it!!
And, send your data to the MD governor, the PA governor, the WVA governor and every other governor in the US since the same data can be accessed using a search warrant in all states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good Lord people. Stop getting your knickers in a wad about nothing.

From Mediaite - hardly a "right wing" source:


“Virginia governor clears path for ‘extreme’ bill allowing police to seek menstrual histories.” That false claim about Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin was tweeted out by The Guardian from four separate accounts to a total of 15 million followers this week.

The allegation traveled even further and wider than that, too. Comedienne Samantha Bee declared that she “would love nothing more than to take the Governor of Virginia through my menstrual history in the most vivid detail.” California governor Gavin Newsom mocked Youngkin as “a totally middle of the road guy that is fighting for access to your menstrual cycle information.”

But Youngkin never cleared any path for a bill to allow authorities to comb through women’s menstrual histories. In fact, no such bill was ever proposed in Old Dominion’s legislature, because it’s already allowed in all 50 states.

What the Guardian was attempting to describe was Youngkin’s opposition to legislation that would specifically bar police from accessing data about menstrual histories (usually stored on phone apps) that are presently obtainable through search warrants — a bill with no direct precedent in the United States.

Maggie Cleary, deputy secretary of public safety and homeland security in Youngkin’s administration noted that the Virginia bill “would be the very first of its kind that I’m aware of, in Virginia or anywhere, that would set a limit on what search warrants can do”

“Currently, any health information or any app information is available via search warrant. We believe that should continue to be the case,” said Cleary.

Since publication, The Guardian has shadow-edited its headline to better reflect the truth, but has notably failed to affix an editor’s to either the article or its tweets about the story — all of which remain up.

+1
As you can see, the usual hysterics are refusing to acknowledge the actual FACTS here. So, so typical. This entire thread should be deleted.