In addition to research, Fidler has been involved extensively in policy debates, advocacy, and litigation involving numerous issues at the intersection of technology and the law.
Fidler currently advises several local coalitions in their efforts to pass ordinances regulating surveillance technologies. She has briefed policymakers, including at the U.S. Senate, the U.K. House of Lords, and the EU Parliament, on various tech policy issues. She has produced white papers, policy proposals, and public comments that have helped inform key tech policy debates.
—Comments to NYPD on impact & use policies for surveillance technologies (2021)
—White Paper on Cross-Border Data Access Reform (2017)
—Comments to Department of Commerce on Export Controls on Technology (2013)
—USA v. Moore-Bush (’21)(1st Cir.)—First Amendment implications of Fourth Amendment decisions
—City of Fullerton v. Friends of Fullerton (’21) (CA state court)—prosecution of journalists under hacking law
—Marland v. Trump (’21) (3rd Cir.)—re the “TikTok” ban, national security powers & the First Amendment
—Lee v. Rosen (’21) (D.C. Cir.)—Bivens claim for damages for violation of First Amendment rights
—Black Lives Matter v. Trump (2020) (D.D.C)—Bivens claim for violation of protester First Amendment rights
—In re Leopold (ongoing ’20-21) (D.C. Circuit/D.D.C)—access to electronic surveillance records
—In re Reporters Committee (’20-21) (D.D.C.)—access to court records re Michael Flynn trial
—<a href="http://%3C%21–%20wp:paragraph%20%7B%22style%22:%7B%22typography%22:%7B%22fontsize%22:%2216px%22%7D%7D%7D%20–%3E%20%3Cp%20style%3D%22font-size:16px"><strong>LitigationIn re LA Times (’21)— unsealing warrant re search of Senator’s home re COVID insider trading (D.D.C.)
Courtesy Jake Belcher/Tufts University