breaching

US tech giant says jury decision misunderstands its products and it will appeal.

Google has been told by a US jury to pay $425m for violating the privacy of tens of millions of users who opted out of a feature tracking app use.

The jury in San Francisco handed down the verdict on Wednesday after a group of Google users accused the tech giant of continuing to collect data from third-party apps even when they changed their account settings to prevent the practice.

Google said the decision misunderstood how its products work and that it planned to appeal.

“Our privacy tools give people control over their data, and when they turn off personalization, we honor that choice,” Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda said in a statement.

In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs alleged that Google collected and sold users’ mobile app activity data in breach of privacy assurances contained in its Web & App Activity settings.

The suit, which was filed in July 2020, covered some 98 million Google users.

During the trial, Google had argued that collected data was “nonpersonal” and “pseudonymous” and stored in “segregated, secured, and encrypted locations”.

Google has faced a number of other recent privacy-related lawsuits.

In May, the tech giant agreed to pay $1.375bn to the state of Texas over claims it had collected residents’ face geometry and voiceprints without proper consent, and tracked users’ locations even when they opted out of the feature.

The United States has announced its first criminal prosecutions against migrants and asylum seekers accused of crossing into a newly created military zone along the country’s border with Mexico.

Court filings submitted on Monday – and reviewed by US media the following day – show that approximately 28 people have been charged with “violations of security regulations” for breaching the military zone.

That charge, though a misdemeanour, carries the possibility of heightened penalties. The US Code stipulates that violations of security regulations can result in a fine of up to $100,000 for individuals or up to a year in prison – or both.

Normally, the consequences for unlawful entry into the US are less severe. But as the administration of President Donald Trump ramps up its crackdown on immigration, critics warn of the growing militarisation of the southern border region neighbouring Mexico.

The new charges were made possible by the establishment of the “New Mexico National Defence Area” on April 18.

The Department of Defense ordered that an Army installation called Fort Huachuca be expanded to include 109,651 acres (44,400 hectares) of federal land, previously held by the Department of the Interior.

The transfer is effective for three years and turns a strip of border land adjacent to Mexico into a US military zone, where trespassing carries serious consequences. That military zone notably overlaps with routes that migrants and asylum seekers have taken to enter the US irregularly, without official paperwork.

Successive presidential administrations, however, have sought to limit asylum applicants from crossing into the US outside of official ports of entry, despite US and international law that protects the right to flee persecution.

The threat of increased penalties has been one of the tools used as deterrence.

Last week, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth visited the recently established military zone, where he touted the strip as a new line of defence against what he called an “invasion” of migrants and asylum seekers.

“This is Department of Defense property. The National Defense Area, formerly known as the Fort Huachuca annex zone, is federal property. Any illegal attempting to enter that zone is entering a military base – a federal, protected area,” Hegseth said.

“You can be detained. You will be detained. You will be interdicted by US troops and border patrol working together.”

Since January, the Trump administration has surged the number of US troops stationed at the border, bringing the total to an estimated 11,900 soldiers.

During his visit, Hegseth revealed that he also plans to expand military zones at other sites along the US border, to add an extra line of defence against irregular migration. He played up the risks of complex criminal prosecutions and lengthy prison sentences.

“If you are an illegal crossing, you will be monitored. You will be detained by US troops. You will be detained temporarily and handed over to Customs and Border Patrol,” he said.

“If you have cut through a fence or jumped over a fence, that’s destruction of government property. If you have attempted to evade, that’s evading law enforcement, just like you would any other military base. You add up the charges of what you can be charged with – misdemeanours and felonies – you could be looking at up to 10 years in prison when prosecuted.”

He added that New Mexico’s attorney general “can’t wait to prosecute” the first group to cross through the military zone.

Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico have voiced opposition to the new tactic, saying that human rights are at risk when the military is deployed to address civilian offences.

“The expansion of military detention powers in the ‘New Mexico National Defence Area’ – also known as the ‘border buffer zone’ – represents a dangerous erosion of the constitutional principle that the military should not be policing civilians,” said Rebecca Sheff, a senior staff lawyer for the group.

Sheff added there could be unintended consequences beyond the government’s attempts to restrict irregular migration.

“We don’t want militarized zones where border residents – including U.S. citizens – face potential prosecution simply for being in the wrong place.”