WBBM-AM 780 spoke with ACLU Attorney Adam Schwartz about a new measure which would regulate the use of automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) by Illinois law enforcement. ALPRs are mounted camera devices used in police cars to scan the license plates on every car in its vicinity. The information collected by the devices are stored in databases and are often used to locate stolen vehicles. However, the ACLU is concerned that ALPRs can be another method for unwarranted surveillance of law-abiding motorists. Schwartz stated:

“Of course, we don’t object to running the plates of passing cars, and seeing if the car going by is the AMBER Alert car everyone’s looking for,” he said.

However, the ACLU objects to unlimited use of the devices.

“What this is is a database of the comings and goings of millions of innocent Americans,” he said.

Read more and listen to the segment.

The Chicago Tribune talked to ACLU of Illinois Communications and Public Policy Director Ed Yohnka about the Real ID Act - a law which was passed in 2005 in light of 9/11. In an effort to combat terrorism by enforcing air travel restrictions, the Real ID Act requires state-issued identification cards to meet certain criteria. A key requirement mandated by the Real ID Act is birth certificate verification, which Illinois currently does not require. The article approximates that an estimated $3.75 million a year would be needed to implement birth certificate verification and to set up a database to store all of the information, which could be shared across state lines. The ACLU has opposed Real ID, citing a range of concerns including costly administrative burdens on state governments, its ineffectiveness against terrorism, increased security risks and threats to privacy. Ed Yohnka told the Chicago Tribune:

"One of the troubling things is that the system to protect our data will no longer be dependent about what happens here in Illinois," Yohnka said. "What happens in Mississippi or Maine or Montana will be a conduit to get to our data. If hackers can get into those systems, they can get to the national system."

He noted that the state's database of driver's licenses has fought off tens of thousands of improper access attempts. "From a pragmatic point of view, all this furor over something that doesn't provide safety and security is ridiculous," Yohnka said

Read the entire article.

It’s a victory for free speech. Internet users, whether they’re on laptops, tablets, or phones are the winners.

The Federal Communications Commission voted to approve the strongest ever regulations of net neutrality.

This has been up for debate for some time now, with supporters explaining that net neutrality really comes down to freedom of speech, allowing internet users to access all sites at equal speeds, no matter the content or the internet provider’s affiliation with the sites visited.

In short, internet users are allowed the freedom to decide what they want to see, when they want to see it, and companies can’t pay internet providers to get their content there faster (or slow down the speed of their competitors’ sites).

As FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler explained, “The internet is simply too important to allow broadband providers to be the ones making the rules.”

The ACLU of Illinois agrees.

There’s no place for discrimination or bias in this country, whether in person or online. Without net neutrality rules in place, there is potential for internet providers to have control over what you’re allowed to read or visit online, blocking what they choose and directing you where they want. It wouldn’t be good for businesses and it wouldn’t be good for consumers.  This groundbreaking and consequential decision by the FCC prevents that from happening.

Opponents say a decision like this creates too much government regulation on the internet. Verizon, which is part of the lawsuit that started this investigation and ultimately this decision, says net neutrality would create unnecessary challenges to high speed internet.

That is not going to happen. Net neutrality is already in place, so technology will be unchanged by this decision. The people who use the internet still need it, they will just be able to decide what they want to do and view, as they are entitled to do.

While the FCC and President Obama have declared their support for net neutrality, the fight isn’t over yet. Congress still needs to sign off on this. Republican Senator John Thune of South Dakota, who is chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, is leading the fight against net neutrality, with a hearing set for March 18.

You can make a difference. Reach out. Tell your representatives that net neutrality is vital and that our freedom of speech and freedom for economic growth could be at risk.