U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 121— STORED WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSACTIONAL RECORDS ACCESS

18 U.S.C. § 2711

Definitions for chapter

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in this chapter—(1) the terms defined in section 2510 of this title have, respectively, the definitions given such terms in that section;(2) the term “remote computing service” means the provision to the public of computer storage or processing services by means of an electronic communications system;(3) the term “court of competent jurisdiction” includes—(A) any district court of the United States (including a magistrate judge of such a court) or any United States court of appeals that—(i) has jurisdiction over the offense being investigated;(ii) is in or for a district in which the provider of a wire or electronic communication service is located or in which the wire or electronic communications, records, or other information are stored; or(iii) is acting on a request for foreign assistance pursuant to section 3512 of this title;(B) a court of general criminal jurisdiction of a State authorized by the law of that State to issue search warrants; or(C) a court-martial or other proceeding under chapter 47 of title 10 (the Uniform Code of Military Justice) to which a military judge has been detailed; and(4) the term “governmental entity” means a department or agency of the United States or any State or political subdivision thereof.(Added Pub. L. 99–508, title II, § 201[(a)], Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1868, § 2710; renumbered § 2711, Pub. L. 100–618, § 2(a)(1), Nov. 5, 1988, 102 Stat. 3195; amended Pub. L. 107–56, title II, § 220(a)(2), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 292; Pub. L. 109–177, title I, § 107(b)(2), Mar. 9, 2006, 120 Stat. 202; Pub. L. 111–79, § 2(2), Oct. 19, 2009, 123 Stat. 2086; Pub. L. 114–328, div. E, title LVII, § 5228(b)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2913.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2016—Par. (3)(C). Pub. L. 114–328 added subpar. (C).

2009—Par. (3). Pub. L. 111–79 substituted “includes—” and subpars. (A) and (B) for “has the meaning assigned by section 3127, and includes any Federal court within that definition, without geographic limitation; and”.

2006—Par. (4). Pub. L. 109–177 added par. (4).

2001—Par. (3). Pub. L. 107–56 added par. (3).

1988—Pub. L. 100–618 renumbered section 2710 of this title as this section.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2016 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 114–328 effective on the date designated by the President [Jan. 1, 2019, with certain conditions and exceptions, see Ex. Ord. No. 13825, set out as a note under section 801 of Title 10, Armed Forces], not later than the first day of the first calendar month beginning two years after Dec. 23, 2016, with implementing regulations prescribed by the President not later than one year after Dec. 23, 2016, and with provisions relating to applicability to various situations, see section 5542 of Pub. L. 114–328, set out as a note under section 801 of Title 10, Armed Forces.

Effective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 21, 1986, and, in the case of conduct pursuant to a court order or extension, applicable only with respect to court orders or extensions made after such effective date, see section 202 of Pub. L. 99–508, set out as a note under section 2701 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 105 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Fulgiam, 73 N.E.3d 798 (Mass. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Fulgiam, 73 N.E.3d 798 (Mass. 2017). · cites it 4× “See 18 U.S.C. § 2711 . 19 § 2703(a), the dispositive issue is whether this content was held in "electronic storage" by "a provider of electronic communication service.”
John K. Maciver Inst. for Pub. Policy, Inc. v. Schmitz, 885 F.3d 1004 (7th Cir. 2018). · cites it 4× “] 18 U.S.C. § 2711 . MacIver alleges that the warrants issued in this case were not issued by a "court of competent jurisdiction," or even by a "court" at all, rendering the underlying searches unlawful by the terms of the SCA.”
Patrick Hately v. Dr. David Watts, 917 F.3d 770 (4th Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “" 18 U.S.C. § 2711 (2). According to the district court, Blue Ridge College's email service "was not acting as an [electronic communication service] with respect to" the copies of Hately's "delivered and opened" emails accessed by Watts but was instead providing "storage or…”
Vista Mktg., LLC v. Terri A. Burkett, 812 F.3d 954 (11th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “” 18 U.S.C. § 2711 (2). Based on the statutory definition of “electronic storage,” Terri argues that § 2701(a)’s requirement that information be accessed while it is in “electronic storage” with an ECS means that the provision protects emails only while they are still pending…”
State v. Rose, 330 P.3d 680 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “Relevant to this case is section 2703 of the SCA, which governs the circumstances in which a government entity, including state governments, see 18 USC § 2711 (4), may compel a provider of electronic communication services or remote computing services 4 to disclose the contents…”
Flagg ex rel. Bond v. City of Detroit, 252 F.R.D. 346 (E.D. Mich. 2008). · cites it 3× “” 18 U.S.C. § 2711 (2). 8 The potential importance of distinguishing between an “ECS” and an “RCS” lies in the different criteria for establishing an exception to the general rule against disclosure.”
Microsoft Corp. v. United States, 829 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “These amendments to the SCA are fully consistent with the historical role of warrants as legal instruments that pertain to discrete objects located within the United States, and that are designed to protect U.”
United States v. Weaver, 636 F. Supp. 2d 769 (C.D. Ill. 2009). · cites it 3× “18 U.S.C. § 2711 . The Wiretap Act does not define “storage,” but it defines “electronic storage” as: (A) any temporary, intermediate storage of a wire or electronic communication incidental to the electronic transmission thereof; and (B) any storage of such communication by an…”
Moss v. State, 783 S.E.2d 652 (Ga. 2016). “See 18 USC § 2703 (c) (authorizing governmental entities to require providers of electronic communication service to disclose records and other information pertaining to a subscriber, but not the contents of communications, through, among other means, a state warrant issued “by…”
In Re JetBlue Airways Corp. Privacy Litig., 379 F. Supp. 2d 299 (E.D.N.Y 2005). · cites it 2× “” 18 U.S.C. § 2711 (2). Plaintiffs allege that the JetBlue Passenger Reservation Systems 6 constitute an “electronic communication service” within the meaning of the statute.”
Long v. Insight Commc'ns of Cent. Ohio, LLC, 804 F.3d 791 (6th Cir. 2015). · cites it 3× “See 18 U.S.C. § 2711 (1) (" 'electronic communication service’ means any service which provides to users thereof the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications”) (incorporating definition from 18 U.”
Preventive Med. Assocs., Inc. v. Commonwealth, 992 N.E.2d 257 (Mass. 2013). · cites it 3× “276, § IB (a), refers (see note 16, supra), provides the procedures that a “governmental entity” — defined to mean any department or agency of the United States or any State or political subdivision, see 18 U.S.C. § 2711 (4) — must follow in order to obtain a user’s e-mails or…”
Show all 105 citing cases →
— 18 U.S.C. § 2711(1) — 1 case
Jennings v. Jennings, 736 S.E.2d 242 (S.C. 2012).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.