zlacker

>>ceejay+(OP)
To be honest, this seems like a pretty reasonable search; a warranted search, narrowly scoped in both keywords (a specific address) and timeframe.

Meanwhile, this:

> “If Google is allowed or required to turn over information in this Colorado case, there is nothing to stop a court in a state that has outlawed abortion to also require Google to turn over information on that kind of keyword search.”

seems like it's of entirely different magnitude, far less amenable to such a narrow scope.

>>ceejay+i6
Would person ___ searches 'within 2 weeks of last menstruation' be narrow enough?

The case of this is fine to me on it's face. But examples like the above are terrifying.

>>dillon+ij
I don’t think that’d be comparably narrow, no.

>>ceejay+Oj
how about adding specific person Jane Doe searches address ___ of planned parenthood within 2 weeks of last menstruation

To me the ultimate problem isn't the scope of the search. It's that the guardrails against partisanship are gone via takeover of law by Republicans and christian crusaders.

Attorneys general and judiciaries have huge power and are so lopsided depending on geography and political party in charge. and I don't trust the ultimate Supreme Court to do what's right in the end

that it's illegal now is crazy. That is seems likely that they will try to prosecute people (more likely TX style citizen suits) for getting healthcare in a different state is crazier.