FTC’s Slaughter Asks Congress for Data Access, Deletion Rights

Congress should enact federal privacy legislation that would give internet users the right to access and delete personal information, FTC acting Chairwoman Rebecca Kelly Slaughter wrote in a recent letter to Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. An aide for Klobuchar, who supports access and deletion rights, said Tuesday the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee chair will continue pushing for such legislation.

Legislation should include “meaningful limitations on companies’ use of personal data, ensuring that firms cannot misuse sensitive personal information -- including access and deletion rights,” Slaughter wrote in an April letter to Klobuchar that was released to us now under a Freedom of Information Act request. She noted there’s no federal law giving consumers the right to review or remove information from data brokers. Her request is a departure from ex-Chairman Joe Simons, who consistently called for rulemaking authority, civil penalty authority and jurisdiction over nonprofits and common carriers (see 1909250045). Slaughter also backed those new authorities.

Klobuchar wrote Slaughter raising concerns about data exploitation of domestic violence, sexual violence and stalking victims and about data brokers publicizing location and contact information. “The abuse of consumer data to facilitate stalking and domestic violence certainly merits exploration from a rulemaking perspective,” Slaughter replied. The acting chair recently formed a rulemaking group within the agency’s general counsel’s office (see 2105040057).

The Division of Privacy and Identity Protection doesn’t have the resources it needs to police data brokers and deter bad behavior, Slaughter wrote. She noted the DPIP has 40-45 full-time equivalents, compared with 768 staffers employed by the U.K. Information Commissioners’ office and 150 employees at the Irish Data Protection Commissioner’s office. If given additional resources for protecting consumers against stalking and domestic violence threats, the FTC would hire additional investigators, add technologists, use outside experts and “accelerate” efforts to use the agency’s rulemaking authority, said Slaughter. The Biden administration’s 2022 budget proposes the addition of 110 staffers across agency bureaus (see 2105280055).

Slaughter requested additional resources and funding, in an April letter to Senate Consumer Protection Subcommittee Chairman Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. She noted the agency’s commitment to aggressively using new enforcement tools granted under the newly enacted COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act, which authorizes the agency to seek civil penalties for pandemic-related deceptive acts and practices. “We will aggressively enforce this Act in our law enforcement cases, where appropriate, and already have enforcement action using this authority underway,” Slaughter wrote. Blumenthal’s office didn’t comment.

The agency brought its first case under the new authority in April, seeking monetary penalties against a chiropractor who allegedly engaged in deceptive marketing on social media and various websites. Asked about further enforcement action and public updates, a spokesperson on Tuesday cited the first case.

The FTC continues to monitor online platforms and marketplaces for specific sellers and general areas of concern related to the pandemic, wrote Slaughter: “If platforms and marketplaces fail to cooperate or engage in practices that violate their promises to consumers or otherwise violate the law, we will investigate and pursue law enforcement where appropriate.” Slaughter said she has been in direct contact with state attorneys general about enforcement coordination.

Slaughter noted the agency’s weakened authority under FTC Act Section 13(b) (see 2105190048), in the letter to Blumenthal. She called it the “most important legal authority” for protecting consumers and holding violators accountable, and noted all commissioners urged Congress last fall to restore the authority after a series of unfavorable court decisions.

The only alternative is Section 19, which is “far more limited in scope and more procedurally cumbersome,” the commissioner wrote. Redress is available only after a full administrative proceeding and appeal, which can take years and requires significant investment of agency resources, she said. Section 19 requires the agency to show a reasonable person would have known that the conduct in question was dishonest or fraudulent, a higher standard than 13(b), she said. Section 19 has a three-year statute of limitations, and it could take years for the commission to gather enough complaints to justify an investigation, she wrote. Without 13(b), cases will take more time, consumers will have to wait longer for redress and some may get none at all, she wrote.