Right to Privacy in the Constitution and States

What Is the Right to Privacy

The right to privacy is the right to make certain personal decisions, and keep certain personal matters, free from government interference. The U.S. Constitution never uses the word, so the Supreme Court built the right from other guarantees, starting with a 1965 ruling on birth control. It now protects choices about contraception, intimate relationships, marriage and raising children, while the Fourth Amendment separately guards your home, your car and your phone against unreasonable searches.

A right that rests on court rulings can be narrowed by later rulings, and that is what made 2022 matter beyond abortion. The rest of this page shows where the right comes from, which rulings still stand, and what your own state adds.

Where the Right to Privacy Comes From

The right to privacy grew out of three separate ideas, and each now has its own home in the law. Justice Louis Brandeis described the core of it in a 1928 dissent, calling “the right to be let alone” “the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men” (Olmstead v. United States). His side lost that case, which let police wiretap phones without a warrant, but his phrase outlived the ruling.

Justice William O. Douglas turned the idea into doctrine in Griswold. He wrote that “specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance,” and that “various guarantees create zones of privacy.” Penumbras are shadows at the edges, so his point was that the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Ninth Amendments protect more than their exact words. He asked whether police should be allowed to “search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives” (Griswold v. Connecticut).

Later cases moved the right to firmer ground, the word “liberty” in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Courts call this substantive due process: the idea that some freedoms are so basic that no fair procedure can justify taking them away. Our 14th Amendment explainer and due process explainer cover that clause in depth.

The second kind belongs to the 4th Amendment explainer, which covers what police can search, and to our mass surveillance explainer, which covers what the government collects. This page stays with the first and third.

Landmark Supreme Court Rulings on Privacy

Eight rulings built the modern right to privacy, and one of them took a piece of it away. The Court recognized it for married couples in 1965 and for phone calls in 1967. It extended birth control to unmarried people in 1972 and covered abortion in 1973. Intimate relationships between adults followed in 2003, marriage for same-sex couples in 2015, and phone location records in 2018. Then Dobbs removed the abortion right in 2022.

1. 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut Married couples may use birth control. 7-2.
2. 1967 Katz v. United States Phone calls are private even in a booth. 7-1.
3. 1972 Eisenstadt v. Baird Unmarried people get the same birth control right. 6-1.
4. 1973 Roe v. Wade Privacy covers the abortion decision. 7-2.
5. 2003 Lawrence v. Texas States may not criminalize same-sex intimacy. 6-3.
6. 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges Marriage is open to same-sex couples. 5-4.
7. 2018 Carpenter v. United States Police need a warrant for phone location records. 5-4.
8. 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Roe overruled; abortion returned to the states.

Sources: Supreme Court opinions via Cornell LII.

How the Supreme Court built, then cut back, the right to privacy: 1965: Griswold v. Connecticut (Married couples may use birth control. 7-2.). 1967: Katz v. United States (Phone calls are private even in a booth. 7-1.). 1972: Eisenstadt v. Baird (Unmarried people get the same birth control right. 6-1.). 1973: Roe v. Wade (Privacy covers the abortion decision. 7-2.). 2003: Lawrence v. Texas (States may not criminalize same-sex intimacy. 6-3.). 2015: Obergefell v. Hodges (Marriage is open to same-sex couples. 5-4.). 2018: Carpenter v. United States (Police need a warrant for phone location records. 5-4.). 2022: Dobbs v. Jackson (Roe overruled; abortion returned to the states.).

1965: In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Court struck down Connecticut’s ban on birth control for married couples, the case that opens this page.

1967: In Katz v. United States, the Court held that the Fourth Amendment protects a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy, even in a public phone booth.

1972: In Eisenstadt v. Baird, the Court extended the birth control right to unmarried people, writing that “if the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.”

1973: In Roe v. Wade, the Court held that the right to privacy covers the decision to end a pregnancy. Our Roe v. Wade explainer covers what it decided and why it fell.

2003: In Lawrence v. Texas, the Court struck down a Texas law that made sex between two men a crime, overruling a 1986 decision that had upheld such laws.

2015: In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires every state to license and recognize marriages between two people of the same sex. Our same-sex marriage explainer covers where that ruling stands.

2018: In Carpenter v. United States, the Court required a warrant for the phone location records a cell company keeps.

2022: In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Court overruled Roe and held that the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion. Our Dobbs explainer shows where abortion is legal now.

Which Privacy Rulings Still Stand After Dobbs

Every privacy ruling except Roe still stands, but Dobbs changed the test that protects them. The majority said a right not written in the Constitution must be “deeply rooted” in the nation’s history and tradition, and abortion was not. It also wrote that “nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion” (Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization).

Justice Clarence Thomas went further in a concurrence no other justice joined. He wrote that “in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” That sentence is why contraception and marriage came up in Congress within weeks.

Where each privacy ruling and law stands

As of September 26, 2026

• Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), birth control in marriage Final ruling, still binding

  Named by Justice Thomas in 2022 as a ruling to reconsider. No case asking the Court to do so has been taken. (source)

• Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972), birth control for unmarried people Final ruling, still binding

  Still the rule nationwide. (source)

• Lawrence v. Texas (2003), intimate relationships Final ruling, still binding

  Named by Justice Thomas in 2022. Some state sodomy laws remain in the text but cannot be enforced. (source)

• Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), marriage Final ruling, still binding

  The Court denied Kim Davis's petition to revisit it on November 10, 2025. (source)

• Roe v. Wade (1973), abortion Ended, overruled

  Overruled by Dobbs on June 24, 2022. (source)

• Respect for Marriage Act Law

  Signed December 13, 2022. Federal law recognizes any marriage valid where it was performed, and states must honor other states' marriages. (source)

• Right to Contraception Act (S. 4381) Proposal, stalled

  The Senate voted 51-39 to take it up on June 5, 2024, short of the 60 needed. (source)

Source: Supreme Court opinions and docket 25-125; senate.gov roll call 190 (2024); govinfo

Congress wrote marriage into federal law after Dobbs, but not contraception. That leaves the birth control right resting only on Griswold and Eisenstadt, which is why supporters keep reintroducing a contraception bill.

State Constitutions That Protect Privacy

Your state constitution can protect privacy more than the federal one does, and 11 states say so in writing. 6 of them name privacy as its own right. The other 5 add “privacy” or “private affairs” to the clause on searches and seizures, which courts often read more narrowly. The remaining 39 states have no explicit clause, though their courts can still find privacy protections in other language.

Does your state protect privacy in its constitution or by law?

Choose your state to see its constitution's privacy language and whether it has a consumer data privacy law. The map shows one question at a time.

Choose your state to see its rules Select a state AlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming

Constitution text is quoted from the Georgia Law Review survey. Data-law dates come from legal trackers and, for Vermont, the act itself.

Privacy in the state constitutionConsumer data privacy law

Privacy in the state constitution

• Named as its own right (6 states)
• In the search-and-seizure clause (5 states)
• No explicit clause (39 states and D.C.)

A search-clause state protects privacy mainly against government searches. States without a clause still get every federal privacy right.

Sources: Tiffany C. Li, State Constitutional Rights to Privacy, 59 Georgia Law Review 1307 (2025); State Court Report, State Privacy Rights Are More Important Than Ever (September 14, 2026); Clym, U.S. State Privacy Laws comparison guide (June 23, 2026); Privacy World, Adding to the Count (August 17, 2026); Vermont Act 145 as enacted (2026). Verified September 26, 2026.

Privacy in the state constitution

State	Privacy in the state constitution	What the constitution says	Comprehensive consumer data privacy law
Alabama	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Passed. Takes effect May 1, 2027.
Alaska	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Arizona	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Arkansas	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
California	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are ... pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.”	Yes. In force since January 1, 2020.
Colorado	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2023.
Connecticut	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2023.
Delaware	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
District of Columbia	D.C. has no state constitution.	None	No comprehensive data privacy law.
Florida	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into the person’s private life except as otherwise provided herein.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Georgia	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Hawaii	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Idaho	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Illinois	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“The people shall have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and other possessions against unreasonable searches, seizures, invasions of privacy or interceptions of communications.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Indiana	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2026.
Iowa	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
Kansas	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Kentucky	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2026.
Louisiana	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“Every person shall be secure in his person, property, communications, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches, seizures, or invasions of privacy.”	Passed. Takes effect January 1, 2027.
Maine	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Maryland	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since October 1, 2025.
Massachusetts	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Michigan	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Minnesota	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 31, 2025.
Mississippi	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Missouri	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Montana	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“The right of individual privacy is essential to the well-being of a free society and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest.”	Yes. In force since October 1, 2024.
Nebraska	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
Nevada	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
New Hampshire	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“An individual’s right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent.”	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
New Jersey	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 15, 2025.
New Mexico	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
New York	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
North Carolina	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
North Dakota	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Ohio	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Oklahoma	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Passed. Takes effect January 1, 2027.
Oregon	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2024.
Pennsylvania	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Rhode Island	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2026.
South Carolina	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures and unreasonable invasions of privacy shall not be violated.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
South Dakota	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Tennessee	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2025.
Texas	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2024.
Utah	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since December 31, 2023.
Vermont	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Passed. Takes effect January 1, 2028.
Virginia	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2023.
Washington	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
West Virginia	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Wisconsin	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Wyoming	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.

See all states in a table

All states Named as its own right (6 states)In the search-and-seizure clause (5 states)No explicit clause (39 states and D.C.) Showing 51 of 51 states

State	Privacy in the state constitution	What the constitution says	Comprehensive consumer data privacy law
Alabama	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Passed. Takes effect May 1, 2027.
Alaska	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Arizona	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Arkansas	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
California	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are ... pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.”	Yes. In force since January 1, 2020.
Colorado	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2023.
Connecticut	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2023.
Delaware	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
District of Columbia	D.C. has no state constitution.	None	No comprehensive data privacy law.
Florida	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into the person’s private life except as otherwise provided herein.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Georgia	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Hawaii	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Idaho	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Illinois	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“The people shall have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and other possessions against unreasonable searches, seizures, invasions of privacy or interceptions of communications.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Indiana	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2026.
Iowa	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
Kansas	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Kentucky	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2026.
Louisiana	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“Every person shall be secure in his person, property, communications, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches, seizures, or invasions of privacy.”	Passed. Takes effect January 1, 2027.
Maine	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Maryland	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since October 1, 2025.
Massachusetts	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Michigan	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Minnesota	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 31, 2025.
Mississippi	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Missouri	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Montana	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“The right of individual privacy is essential to the well-being of a free society and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest.”	Yes. In force since October 1, 2024.
Nebraska	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
Nevada	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
New Hampshire	Yes. Privacy is named as its own right.	“An individual’s right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent.”	Yes. In force since January 1, 2025.
New Jersey	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 15, 2025.
New Mexico	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
New York	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
North Carolina	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
North Dakota	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Ohio	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Oklahoma	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Passed. Takes effect January 1, 2027.
Oregon	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2024.
Pennsylvania	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Rhode Island	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2026.
South Carolina	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures and unreasonable invasions of privacy shall not be violated.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
South Dakota	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Tennessee	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2025.
Texas	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since July 1, 2024.
Utah	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since December 31, 2023.
Vermont	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Passed. Takes effect January 1, 2028.
Virginia	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	Yes. In force since January 1, 2023.
Washington	Yes, inside the clause on searches and seizures.	“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.”	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
West Virginia	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Wisconsin	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.
Wyoming	No explicit privacy clause. Federal rights still apply.	None	No comprehensive consumer data privacy law.

Sources: Tiffany C. Li, State Constitutional Rights to Privacy, 59 Georgia Law Review 1307 (2025); State Court Report, State Privacy Rights Are More Important Than Ever (September 14, 2026); Clym, U.S. State Privacy Laws comparison guide (June 23, 2026); Privacy World, Adding to the Count (August 17, 2026); Vermont Act 145 as enacted (2026). Verified September 26, 2026.

State courts have used these clauses to go further than the Supreme Court. Alaska’s Supreme Court held in Ravin v. State (1975) that adults may keep a small amount of marijuana for personal use in their homes. Montana’s struck down the state’s ban on same-sex intimacy in Gryczan v. State (1997), six years before Lawrence, and held in Armstrong v. State (1999) that its constitution protects the choice of abortion (Georgia Law Review). Since Dobbs, these clauses have become the main place abortion rights are argued, as the State Court Report noted in September 2026.

Your Data and State Privacy Laws

No federal law protects your personal data across the board, so your rights depend on your state. Federal laws cover some sectors: HIPAA for health records held by doctors and insurers, FERPA for school records, and COPPA for children under 13 online. The rest, from the apps on your phone to the data brokers that buy location records, falls to the states.

Most state data privacy laws are new: 65% took effect in 2025 or later, or have not started yet. California’s came first, in 2020.

State consumer data privacy laws taking effect, by year

Category	Value
2020	1
2023	4
2024	3
2025	8
2026	3
2027 (passed, not yet in force)	3
2028 (passed, not yet in force)	1

Sources: Clym comparison guide (June 2026); Privacy World (August 2026); Vermont Act 145. Mississippi and Florida not counted.

The laws follow a shared model. Most give residents the right to see the data a company holds on them, correct it, delete it, take a copy, and opt out of its sale or use for targeted ads. They are enforced by state attorneys general, and most do not let an individual sue. California’s is the exception for data breaches.

The Honest Disagreement

Scholars who support the rulings this right produced still argue about whether “privacy” is the right name for it. Critics make three main points, and defenders answer each.

• The text. Justice Hugo Black, dissenting in Griswold, called Connecticut’s law as offensive as the majority did, but said he got “nowhere” by treating privacy as an emanation from the Bill of Rights. Northwestern law professor Steven Calabresi argued in August 2026 that there is no constitutional “right to privacy,” and that the Constitution’s equality principles are a better basis for rulings like Griswold (SCOTUSblog). Defenders answer that the Ninth Amendment says the rights listed are not the only ones people have.
• Who decides. The Dobbs majority argued that rights not rooted in history belong to voters and legislatures. The three dissenters answered that “either the mass of the majority’s opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat.”
• Not every privacy claim is constitutional. The Constitution limits the government, not private companies. A company that sells your data, or a neighbor who spies on you, is governed by state law, including the privacy torts courts recognize, not by Griswold.

What You Can Do

1. Use your state’s data rights. If your state is one of the 19 with a law in force, look for a “Your privacy choices” or “Do not sell my information” link on the sites you use, and send a deletion request to data brokers.

2. Turn on a browser signal. Several state laws, including California’s and Colorado’s, require companies to honor Global Privacy Control, a browser setting that tells every site you do not want your data sold. The Global Privacy Control site lists the browsers and extensions that send it.

3. Ask your state legislators for a law if you do not have one. 27 states have no comprehensive data privacy law. Ask your legislators whether they will sponsor one, and whether it will let residents sue.

4. Ask your members of Congress where they stand on the Right to Contraception Act. It fell short in the Senate in 2024. Our guide to writing your representatives walks through a short, specific letter.