• Home
  • News
  • Coins2Day 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia
TechPointCloud

Why an Appeals Court Won’t Reconsider the Microsoft Email Seizure Ruling

By
Reuters
Reuters
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Reuters
Reuters
Down Arrow Button Icon
January 24, 2017, 10:17 AM ET
Microsoft Corp. Opens New Office And Experience Center
An employee uses a Microsoft Corp. Surface tablet computer at the company's Office and Experience Center during a media event for the opening of the workspace in Hong Kong, China, on Friday, March 4, 2016. Microsoft is rolling out a new service for its Windows 10 operating system to help large businesses detect hackers, security threats and unusual behavior on their networks, rivaling companies like FireEye Inc. and Symantec Corp. Photographer: Billy H.C. Kwok/Bloomberg via Getty ImagesBill H.C. Kwok—Bloomberg via Getty Images

An equally divided federal appeals court on Tuesday refused to reconsider its landmark decision that the U.S. Government cannot force Microsoft and other companies to turn over customer emails stored on servers outside the United States.

By a 4-4 vote, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan let stand a July 14 decision that was seen as a victory for privacy advocates and for technology companies offering cloud computing and other services worldwide.

Microsoft (MSFT) and the U.S. Department of Justice did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The case concerned Microsoft’s objection to a warrant seeking emails from a Dublin, Ireland server in a narcotics case.

Microsoft was thought to be the first U.S. Company to challenge a domestic search warrant seeking data held outside the country.

Get Data Sheet, Coins2Day’s technology newsletter.

In the July decision, Circuit Judge Susan Carney said communications held by U.S. Service providers on servers outside the United States were beyond the reach of domestic search warrants issued under a 1986 federal law known as the Stored Communications Act.

The four dissenting judges on Tuesday said that decision could unnecessarily hamstring law enforcement.

Circuit Judge Jose Cabranes wrote in dissent that the decision “has indisputably, and severely, restricted an essential investigative tool used thousands of times a year in important criminal investigations around the country. To top this off, the panel majority’s decision does not serve any serious, legitimate, or substantial privacy interest.”

About the Author
By Reuters
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Coins2Day 500
  • Global 500
  • Coins2Day 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Coins2Day Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Coins2Day Brand Studio
  • Coins2Day Analytics
  • Coins2Day Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Coins2Day
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Coins2Day Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Coins2Day Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.