Major U.S. technology companies have expressed support for employees affected by the Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. But some activists and lawmakers fear the business activities of those companies could result in legal action against people suspected of violating federal or state laws. Last week, the high court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. That ruling recognized a woman’s constitutional right to have an abortion. An abortion is a medical procedure that ends a pregnancy. The Guttmacher Institute, an organization that supports abortion rights, says 26 American states are likely to ban abortion without Roe v. Wade. Some states, including Texas, Oklahoma and Idaho, have laws that permit private citizens to bring legal actions against anyone who assists a woman seeking an abortion. Technology companies including Google, Apple, Meta, Amazon and Microsoft reacted to the decision by offering benefits aimed at supporting their employees. All of these companies have announced they will cover costs for workers who need to travel to other areas to legally receive abortion services. But concerns have been raised that these technology companies might not protect private user data that could be used to identify and possibly prosecute people seeking ways to get an abortion. Clear examples from the past have demonstrated that whenever personal data is tracked or stored, there is always a risk that the information could be misused or abused. Privacy groups and some lawmakers have warned that different forms of personal data could be provided to law enforcement and used in legal cases linked to new state abortion laws. This could include location tracking data, text messages, emails and internet search histories collected by technology companies.

This could include location tracking data, text messages, emails and internet search histories collected by technology companies.
messages
massages
mysteries
minting
What was the landmark 1973 decision called that ruled on abortion?
Roe v. Wade
Plessy v. Ferguson
Miranda v. Arizona
United States v. Nixon
Which of the following is a definition of the word prosecute?
institute legal proceedings against
a declaration of assurance
to further progress
come before in time