Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 MARCH 2024

White House Unveils New Order To Protect Bulk Data

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

On February 28, 2024, President Joe Biden signed an executive order to protect America's bulk sensitive personal data.

United StatesPrivacy
Lynn Parker Dupree
Lynn Parker Dupree
Emmanuel N. Onochie
Emmanuel N. Onochie
Author LinkedIn connections

On February 28, 2024, President Joe Biden signed an executive order to protect America's bulk sensitive personal data. This executive order provides an overview of upcoming regulations to limit foreign countries' access to the bulk sensitive personal data of United States persons and the United States Government when such access poses an unacceptable security risk. These regulations aim to balance the unacceptable risks associated with bulk data flow and the need to support secure data flow across borders for legitimate economic, scientific, and trade purposes.

The order defines sensitive personal data as covered personal identifiers, geolocation and related sensor data, biometric identifiers, human 'omic data, personal health data, personal financial data, or any combination thereof, as further defined in regulations issued by the Attorney General pursuant to Section 2 of the order, and that could be exploited by a country of concern to harm United States national

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

SB 54 Is In Effect: What California’s New Packaging Law Means For Your Business

Although being challenged by an injunction filed on August 20, 2026, by a coalition of 17 states, California’s SB 54 Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act is now in effect, and companies that sell, distribute, import, or ship packaged products into California should be evaluating whether they have compliance obligations.
United StatesPrivacy
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Article

California’s 2026 Legislative Session Wraps: A Wave Of Privacy And AI Bills Reaches The Governor, With Key Child Safety And AI Measures Signed Into Law

California's 2026 legislative session concluded with Governor Newsom signing several landmark privacy and AI bills into law, including comprehensive child safety measures, AI auditor oversight frameworks, and expanded data protection requirements. How will these new regulations reshape digital advertising, workplace AI deployment, and online platform obligations for businesses operating in California?
United StatesPrivacy
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
Article

The Data Breach Brief: Week Of September 30th, 2026

Multiple organizations have recently disclosed significant data breaches affecting thousands of individuals, with compromised information ranging from basic contact details to highly sensitive medical records and financial data. The incidents span various sectors including healthcare, insurance, and professional services, raising questions about the scope of exposure and potential remedies for affected individuals.
United StatesPrivacy
Morgan & Morgan
Morgan & Morgan
Article

California Legislation: End-Of-Session Check-In

California's legislature has sent a comprehensive package of privacy, AI, and advertising bills to Governor Newsom's desk, with decisions due by September 30, 2026. The legislation addresses sensitive personal information protections, data broker obligations, AI-powered chatbot regulations, and digital replica rights, potentially reshaping how businesses handle consumer data and automated decision-making systems. Will these bills become law and set new national standards for technology regulation?
United StatesPrivacy
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Article

Emerging Enforcement Trends In Digital Health Data Privacy: Lessons From Washington’s My Health My Data, FTC vs. Hims & Hers And UCHealth Enforcement Actions

Federal and state regulators are intensifying scrutiny of healthcare and digital health companies over tracking technologies that share sensitive patient data with advertising platforms. Recent enforcement actions against major telehealth providers and healthcare systems reveal how common marketing practices can trigger significant legal liability under privacy laws, even for organizations not covered by HIPAA.
United StatesPrivacy
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP
Article

Updates On Export Controls Impacting AI & Advanced Computing

The U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security issued guidance on May 31, 2026, clarifying licensing requirements for advanced computing items and AI technologies. The guidance maintains export restrictions for entities in certain countries while providing limited relief for data center operators, though questions remain about future regulatory direction. Companies must now strengthen their compliance programs and supply-chain due diligence as BIS continues to prioritize national security
GlobalInternational Law
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Article

Blaker V. NetScout Systems: A Narrow Reading Of The Pen Register And Trap And Trace Provisions Of The California Invasion Of Privacy Act In California State Court

On May 27, 2026, the Superior Court of California held that subdivision (a) of California Penal Code § 638.51 does not apply to software on commercial websites. Plaintiff Brian Blaker sued Defendant NetScout, Inc., alleging the Defendant had violated § 638.51 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act by implementing a software development kit (SDK) on its website.
United StatesPrivacy
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Article

Privacy Law Mid-Year Update: Key EU And UK Data Protection Decisions

Recent EU and UK court decisions have reshaped the landscape of data protection compliance, clarifying critical boundaries around consent, data subject rights, cybersecurity obligations, and children's privacy. These rulings demonstrate that organizations must move beyond formal compliance to embed proportionality, accountability, and risk-based decision-making into their data processing activities, even when disclosures are legally required or supported by valid legal bases.
GlobalPrivacy
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Article

Finding A Lack Of Bona Fide Use, TTAB Affirms Cancellation Of Everwise Credit Union Registration Under The Lanham Act’s Reexamination Procedure

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's precedential decision in In re Everwise Credit Union examines whether a credit union's use of its mark constituted bona fide commercial use or merely token use designed to reserve trademark rights. The case centers on whether Everwise Credit Union had actually used its mark in commerce by the deadline to file its Statement of Use, or whether the mark's appearance on its website was simply a placeholder for a future rebrand that occurred two months later.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Article

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: June 2026

A Massachusetts district court grants a joint motion to stay proceedings while the parties conduct venue discovery and brief a motion to dismiss or transfer in a patent infringement case between Advanced Surgical Concepts Limited and Intuitive Surgical, Inc. The order establishes specific parameters for discovery scope and briefing schedule before other case deadlines resume.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Article

Staying True To The Specification: Federal Circuit Vacates Preliminary Injunction Based On Unsupported Claim Constructions

The Federal Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction in a patent infringement case involving electrical outlet cover products, finding that the district court made critical errors in its claim construction analysis. The appellate court determined that the lower court improperly imposed unsupported limitations on key patent terms and incorrectly applied a presumption of irreparable harm.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP