Abstract
This Note deals with 18 U.S. C. 1030, otherwise known as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ("CFAA "). The CFAA is the federal computer hacking statute. This Note discusses the statute's history, purpose, and the recent circuit split regarding its interpretation. There are two ways to interpret the statute: one is broad and the other narrow. The broad interpretation, which many, if not a majority of circuit courts adopt, extends criminal liability to potentially millions of unsuspecting Americans. The approach is wholly unfair and unreasonable. But more than that, this Note argues that the broad interpretation is unconstitutional. There are two reasons why. First, it is void for vagueness in that it fails to provide notice of what conduct is prohibited. Second, it is an impermissible private delegation of lawmaking power, allowing contract drafters the power to delineate criminal sanctions. After arguing that the statute is unconstitutional, this Note proposes one way to limit the statute's wide scope: presidential discretionary non-enforcement.
Recommended Citation
Michael C. Mikulic,
Note, The Unconstitutionality of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,
30
Notre Dame J.L. Ethics & Pub. Pol'y
175
(2016).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp/vol30/iss1/7