[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"blog-slug_blog_3_1":3,"blog-slug_blog_first-signs-that-bidens-eo-on-data-transfers-will-be-challenged_1000_1":40},{"article":4,"articles":15,"meta":33,"languages":39},{"id":5,"title":6,"excerpt":7,"locale":8,"slug":9,"authorSlug":10,"automaticTranslated":11,"publishedAt":12,"updatedAt":13,"doFollowLinks":11,"showIndex":11,"showCallToActions":11,"articleType":14},3060,"The EU wants to kill cookie banners","The EU wants to end annoying cookie pop-ups by letting users set their consent once in their browser. If passed, websites will have to respect those choices.","en","the-eu-wants-to-kill-cookie-banners-by-moving-consent-to-your-browser","iron-brands",false,"2025-11-20T05:40:14.356Z","2025-11-20T06:13:15.812Z","blog",[4,16,26],{"id":17,"title":18,"excerpt":19,"locale":8,"slug":20,"authorSlug":10,"automaticTranslated":11,"publishedAt":21,"updatedAt":22,"ctaTitle":23,"ctaDescription":24,"doFollowLinks":11,"showIndex":25,"showCallToActions":11,"articleType":14},3019,"Google is tracking you (even when you use DuckDuckGo)","Google tracks users even on DuckDuckGo via Analytics and embeds. A new study shows how deep Google’s web tracking really goes.","google-is-tracking-you-even-when-you-use-duck-duck-go","2025-07-14T08:56:41.709Z","2025-07-14T11:26:01.386Z","If you care about privacy, you don't use Google Analytics","Ditch the tracking, keep the insights. Try Simple Analytics.",true,{"id":27,"title":28,"excerpt":29,"locale":8,"slug":30,"authorSlug":10,"automaticTranslated":11,"publishedAt":31,"updatedAt":32,"doFollowLinks":11,"showIndex":11,"showCallToActions":11,"articleType":14},3018," German court rules Meta’s tracking tech violates GDPR","German court rules Meta’s tracking tech violates GDPR, allowing lawsuits without proof of harm. Big risks ahead for sites using Meta pixels.","german-court-rules-meta-s-tracking-tech-violates-gdpr","2025-07-10T08:20:51.111Z","2025-07-10T12:16:26.327Z",{"pagination":34},{"page":35,"pageSize":36,"pageCount":37,"total":38},1,3,362,1084,{},{"article":41},{"contentHtml":42,"question":43,"content":44,"inlineMedia":45,"id":47,"title":48,"excerpt":49,"locale":8,"slug":50,"authorSlug":51,"automaticTranslated":11,"publishedAt":52,"updatedAt":53,"doFollowLinks":11,"showIndex":25,"showCallToActions":25,"articleType":14,"languages":54},"\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">In a recent \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://www.baden-wuerttemberg.datenschutz.de/usa-eu-datentransfer-durchfuehrungsverordnung-us-praesident/?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">press release\u003C/a> (German only), Baden-Württemberg State Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information Stefan Brink voiced his criticism over US President Joe Biden's executive order on data transfers.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">To be clear, the Commissioner is not the data protection authority of Baden-Württemberg, and his positions don't necessarily reflect the authority's. He is, however, the first privacy institution in Europe to comment on the executive order, so his criticism is worth considering. But first of all, we will need some context.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">\u003Cem>(Update: apparently the EU Parliament is not terribly fond of the Executive Order, either. In May 2023 the institution \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20230505IPR85012/meps-against-greenlighting-personal-data-transfers-with-the-u-s?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">voted against the new data transfer framework\u003C/a> in a non-binding resolution)\u003C/em>\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003Cp>\u003Cimg class=\"mx-auto rounded-lg\" src=\"https://assets.simpleanalytics.com/gifs/hmmm.gif\" />\u003C/p>\n\u003Col class=\"counters\">\u003Cli>\u003CNuxtLink to=\"#the-aftermath-of-schrems-ii\">The aftermath of Schrems II\u003C/NuxtLink>\u003C/li>\u003Cli>\u003CNuxtLink to=\"#the-new-executive-order\">The new executive order\u003C/NuxtLink>\u003C/li>\u003Cli>\u003CNuxtLink to=\"#the-dpos-press-release\">The DPO's press release\u003C/NuxtLink>\u003C/li>\u003Cli>\u003CNuxtLink to=\"#final-thoughts\">Final thoughts\u003C/NuxtLink>\u003C/li>\u003C/ol>\u003CCtaOne />\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">Let's find out!\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  id=\"the-aftermath-of-schrems-ii\" parent=\"\" tag=\"h2\" :articleId=\"273\">The aftermath of Schrems II\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">We already wrote about data transfers extensively \u003CNuxtLink to=\"/blog/how-to-move-forward-with-data-transfers-between-the-eu-us\"  >here\u003C/NuxtLink>, so here's the story in a nutshell. In 2020 the EU Court of Justice issued its landmark \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=CJEU_-_C-311%2F18_-_Schrems_II&utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Schrems II ruling\u003C/a>. This ruling made data transfers to the US tricky for EEA companies for several reasons.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">Before the ruling, personal data could be transferred to the US based on a data transfer framework called \u003Cstrong>Privacy Shield\u003C/strong>. The Court of Justice invalidated the framework in Schrems II, forcing companies to rely on different tools for lawfully exporting their data.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">Most companies need to rely on \u003Cstrong>standard contractual clauses\u003C/strong> (SCCs). SCCs are a set of legally binding clauses drafted by the European Commission, which must be incorporated into a legally binding contract with the data recipient. However, SCCs \u003Cstrong>do not bind the recipient State\u003C/strong>. This is problematic: \u003Cstrong>US surveillance is at the heart of the Schrems case\u003C/strong>, and SCCs cannot prevent the NSA from accessing European data.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">The Schrems II ruling also dealt with SCCs and examined their validity as a mechanism for data transfer. The Court held that SCCs are a valid mechanism for data transfers even when dealing with "unsafe" States, on the condition that the data controller implements effective \u003Cstrong>additional safeguards\u003C/strong> to protect the data. In practice, \u003Cstrong>this is hard to do and entirely impossible for certain types of transfers\u003C/strong>. So the Court essentially "spared" SCCs but made them much trickier.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">After Schrems II, European data protection authorities have started taking a \u003Cstrong>harder approach\u003C/strong> to data transfers. Five DPAs have \u003CNuxtLink to=\"/blog/is-google-analytics-illegal-in-europe\"  >practically banned Google Analytics\u003C/NuxtLink> (we wrote about this extensively), and the Irish privacy authority announced a draft decision to \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://iapp.org/news/a/irish-dpc-files-draft-order-to-halt-metas-data-transfers-to-us/?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">shut down data transfers for Meta Platforms Ireland\u003C/a>. These DPAs are following a coordinated approach\u003Csup id=\"ref-1\">\u003Ca class=\"no-underline p-1\" href=\"#note-1\">1\u003C/a>\u003C/sup>, so there is a real possibility that others will follow their example and that other US service providers will come under fire. This creates a climate of legal uncertainty around US data transfers.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">\u003Cem>(Update: on May 2022 the Irish authority fined Meta Ireland for a record 1.2 billions and ordered to suspend US data transfers for Facebook. We discussed this important decision \u003CNuxtLink to=\"/blog/meta-hit-with-record-breaking-1-3-billion-fine-over-facebook-data-transfers-to-the-us\"  >in depth\u003C/NuxtLink>)\u003C/em>\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  id=\"the-new-executive-order\" parent=\"\" tag=\"h2\" :articleId=\"273\">The new executive order\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">Joe Biden's recent executive order is a first step towards a new framework called the \u003Cstrong>Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework\u003C/strong>. The order implements some material rules to limit the scope of surveillance and lays out a convoluted system for providing people in the EU\u003Csup id=\"ref-2\">\u003Ca class=\"no-underline p-1\" href=\"#note-2\">2\u003C/a>\u003C/sup> with judicial remedies.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">An \u003Cstrong>adequacy decision\u003C/strong> by the European Commission will almost certainly follow in the upcoming months, essentially \u003Cstrong>greenlighting the US as a "safe" country\u003C/strong> for data transfers. This will allow European companies to transfer personal data without the need to implement SCCs and additional safeguards.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">Companies on both sides of the Ocean hope the new framework will bring legal certainty and allow for hassle-free data transfers. However, the future adequacy decision will surely come under scrutiny from the Court of Justice. Privacy NGO noyb \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://noyb.eu/en/new-us-executive-order-unlikely-satisfy-eu-law?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">criticized the new framework\u003C/a> and will likely challenge it in the \u003Cstrong>Court of Justice\u003C/strong>.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  id=\"the-dpos-press-release\" parent=\"\" tag=\"h2\" :articleId=\"273\">The DPO's press release\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">In the upcoming months, the EDPB will issue an opinion on the matter as a part of the decision procedure for the adequacy decision. While the Board's opinion is not binding, it will give us better insight into the core issues of Schrems III.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">In the meantime, the \u003Cstrong>Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information\u003C/strong> for the German State of \u003Cstrong>Baden-Württemberg\u003C/strong> has voiced some concerns over the new executive order. Interestingly, some of the issues raised by the Commissioner were also \u003Cstrong>highlighted by noyb\u003C/strong> in a recent \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://noyb.eu/en/new-us-executive-order-unlikely-satisfy-eu-law?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">press release\u003C/a> (the same we linked above):\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003Cul>\n\u003Cli>Individuals who file a complaint are given very little information about the decision. This can make decisions difficult to appeal in practice.\u003C/li>\n\u003Cli>The Data Protection Review Court (which has the last word on any surveillance complaint) is a branch of the executive and not a part of the US judiciary system. It is unclear whether the CJEU will consider this Court to be independent.\u003C/li>\n\u003Cli>The fact that the executive order mentions proportionality\u003Csup id=\"ref-3\">\u003Ca class=\"no-underline p-1\" href=\"#note-3\">3\u003C/a>\u003C/sup> does not mean that the US surveillance system is, in fact, proportional, as the notion of proportionality may be interpreted differently by the Data Protection Review Court and by the EU Court of Justice.\u003C/li>\n\u003C/ul>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">The Commissioner also voiced other concerns. For instance, executive orders are \u003Cstrong>revocable at will\u003C/strong> by the President, which makes them unsuitable for protecting individual rights. And it is yet unclear how the executive order will \u003Cstrong>interact with existing surveillance regulations\u003C/strong>.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  id=\"final-thoughts\" parent=\"\" tag=\"h2\" :articleId=\"273\">Final thoughts\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">The executive order is very complex, and it will take a while for the privacy community to unpack it all. It's hard to say how a "Schrems III" case will play out, but it's clear already that the new framework is potentially problematic under several aspects. Overall, \u003Cstrong>the future of US data transfers is still unclear\u003C/strong>.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003CContentEditable  parent=\"\" tag=\"p\" :articleId=\"273\">We, \u003CNuxtLink to=\"/\"  >Simple Analytics\u003C/NuxtLink>, will keep you updated on the matter through our \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://theprivacynewsletter.com/?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">privacynewsletter\u003C/a>. If you want to be on the safe side, there are privacy-friendly and GDPR-compliant alternatives to Google Analytics. We are one of them. Feel free to check out what we are building \u003CNuxtLink to=\"https://simpleanalytics.com/simpleanalytics.com\"  referrerpolicy=\"unsafe-url\" rel=\"\">here\u003C/NuxtLink>. Unlike Google, we believe in creating an independent web that is friendly to website visitors. If this resonates with you, feel free to \u003CNuxtLink to=\"/signup\"  >give us a try\u003C/NuxtLink>.\u003C/ContentEditable>\n\u003Cul class=\"not-prose list-none mt-8 pt-6 border-t-2 border-gray-300 dark:border-gray-600 pl-0 text-sm text-red-600\">\u003Cli class=\"text-gray-400 dark:text-gray-500 mb-2\">\u003Ca id=\"note-1\" class=\"no-underline\" href=\"#ref-1\">#1\u003C/a> The decisions against Google Analytics are related to \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://noyb.eu/en/101-complaints-eu-us-transfers-filed?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">101 complaints\u003C/a> filed by NGO noyb over data transfers. The EDPB set up a \u003Ca referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" href=\"https://edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2020/european-data-protection-board-thirty-seventh-plenary-session-guidelines-controller_en?utm_source=simpleanalytics.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">task force\u003C/a> to coordinate the DPAs' approach on a European level.\u003C/li>\n\u003Cli class=\"text-gray-400 dark:text-gray-500 mb-2\">\u003Ca id=\"note-2\" class=\"no-underline\" href=\"#ref-2\">#2\u003C/a> The system will be accessible to anyone in the EU, because they enjoy data protection rights under the GDPR regardless of citizenship.\u003C/li>\n\u003Cli class=\"text-gray-400 dark:text-gray-500 mb-2\">\u003Ca id=\"note-3\" class=\"no-underline\" href=\"#ref-3\">#3\u003C/a> Proportionality is a specific notion under EU law and played an important role in the Schrems II decision. In this context, and as a rule of thumb, you can think of a measure (such as State surveillance) as proportionate when it is both necessary for a legitimate purpose, and not excessive. See Art. 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.\u003C/li>\n\u003C/ul>\n","Will Biden's EO on data transfers be valid?","In a recent [press release](https://www.baden-wuerttemberg.datenschutz.de/usa-eu-datentransfer-durchfuehrungsverordnung-us-praesident/) (German only), Baden-Württemberg State Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information Stefan Brink voiced his criticism over US President Joe Biden's executive order on data transfers.\n\nTo be clear, the Commissioner is not the data protection authority of Baden-Württemberg, and his positions don't necessarily reflect the authority's. He is, however, the first privacy institution in Europe to comment on the executive order, so his criticism is worth considering. But first of all, we will need some context.\n\n_(Update: apparently the EU Parliament is not terribly fond of the Executive Order, either. In May 2023 the institution [voted against the new data transfer framework](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20230505IPR85012/meps-against-greenlighting-personal-data-transfers-with-the-u-s) in a non-binding resolution)_\n\n{% include gif.html slug=\"hmmm\" alt=\"hmmm\" width=\"480\" height=\"400\" color=\"#91837f\" %}\n\n{{tableofcontents}}\n\nLet's find out!\n\n## The aftermath of Schrems II\n\nWe already wrote about data transfers extensively [here](https://www.simpleanalytics.com/blog/how-to-move-forward-with-data-transfers-between-the-eu-us), so here's the story in a nutshell. In 2020 the EU Court of Justice issued its landmark [Schrems II ruling](https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=CJEU_-_C-311/18_-_Schrems_II). This ruling made data transfers to the US tricky for EEA companies for several reasons.\n\nBefore the ruling, personal data could be transferred to the US based on a data transfer framework called **Privacy Shield**. The Court of Justice invalidated the framework in Schrems II, forcing companies to rely on different tools for lawfully exporting their data.\n\nMost companies need to rely on **standard contractual clauses** (SCCs). SCCs are a set of legally binding clauses drafted by the European Commission, which must be incorporated into a legally binding contract with the data recipient. However, SCCs **do not bind the recipient State**. This is problematic: **US surveillance is at the heart of the Schrems case**, and SCCs cannot prevent the NSA from accessing European data.\n\nThe Schrems II ruling also dealt with SCCs and examined their validity as a mechanism for data transfer. The Court held that SCCs are a valid mechanism for data transfers even when dealing with \"unsafe\" States, on the condition that the data controller implements effective **additional safeguards** to protect the data. In practice, **this is hard to do and entirely impossible for certain types of transfers**. So the Court essentially \"spared\" SCCs but made them much trickier.\n\nAfter Schrems II, European data protection authorities have started taking a **harder approach** to data transfers. Five DPAs have [practically banned Google Analytics](https://www.simpleanalytics.com/blog/is-google-analytics-illegal-in-europe) (we wrote about this extensively), and the Irish privacy authority announced a draft decision to [shut down data transfers for Meta Platforms Ireland](https://iapp.org/news/a/irish-dpc-files-draft-order-to-halt-metas-data-transfers-to-us/). These DPAs are following a coordinated approach[^1], so there is a real possibility that others will follow their example and that other US service providers will come under fire. This creates a climate of legal uncertainty around US data transfers.\n\n_(Update: on May 2022 the Irish authority fined Meta Ireland for a record 1.2 billions and ordered to suspend US data transfers for Facebook. We discussed this important decision [in depth](https://www.simpleanalytics.com/blog/meta-hit-with-record-breaking-1-3-billion-fine-over-facebook-data-transfers-to-the-us))_\n\n## The new executive order\n\nJoe Biden's recent executive order is a first step towards a new framework called the **Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework**. The order implements some material rules to limit the scope of surveillance and lays out a convoluted system for providing people in the EU[^2] with judicial remedies.\n\nAn **adequacy decision** by the European Commission will almost certainly follow in the upcoming months, essentially **greenlighting the US as a \"safe\" country** for data transfers. This will allow European companies to transfer personal data without the need to implement SCCs and additional safeguards.\n\nCompanies on both sides of the Ocean hope the new framework will bring legal certainty and allow for hassle-free data transfers. However, the future adequacy decision will surely come under scrutiny from the Court of Justice. Privacy NGO noyb [criticized the new framework](https://noyb.eu/en/new-us-executive-order-unlikely-satisfy-eu-law) and will likely challenge it in the **Court of Justice**.\n\n## The DPO's press release\n\nIn the upcoming months, the EDPB will issue an opinion on the matter as a part of the decision procedure for the adequacy decision. While the Board's opinion is not binding, it will give us better insight into the core issues of Schrems III.\n\nIn the meantime, the **Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information** for the German State of **Baden-Württemberg** has voiced some concerns over the new executive order. Interestingly, some of the issues raised by the Commissioner were also **highlighted by noyb** in a recent [press release](https://noyb.eu/en/new-us-executive-order-unlikely-satisfy-eu-law) (the same we linked above):\n\n- Individuals who file a complaint are given very little information about the decision. This can make decisions difficult to appeal in practice.\n- The Data Protection Review Court (which has the last word on any surveillance complaint) is a branch of the executive and not a part of the US judiciary system. It is unclear whether the CJEU will consider this Court to be independent.\n- The fact that the executive order mentions proportionality[^3] does not mean that the US surveillance system is, in fact, proportional, as the notion of proportionality may be interpreted differently by the Data Protection Review Court and by the EU Court of Justice.\n\nThe Commissioner also voiced other concerns. For instance, executive orders are **revocable at will** by the President, which makes them unsuitable for protecting individual rights. And it is yet unclear how the executive order will **interact with existing surveillance regulations**.\n\n## Final thoughts\n\nThe executive order is very complex, and it will take a while for the privacy community to unpack it all. It's hard to say how a \"Schrems III\" case will play out, but it's clear already that the new framework is potentially problematic under several aspects. Overall, **the future of US data transfers is still unclear**.\n\nWe, [Simple Analytics](https://www.simpleanalytics.com/), will keep you updated on the matter through our [privacynewsletter](https://theprivacynewsletter.com/). If you want to be on the safe side, there are privacy-friendly and GDPR-compliant alternatives to Google Analytics. We are one of them. Feel free to check out what we are building [here](https://simpleanalytics.com/simpleanalytics.com). Unlike Google, we believe in creating an independent web that is friendly to website visitors. If this resonates with you, feel free to [give us a try](https://www.simpleanalytics.com/signup).\n\n[^1]: The decisions against Google Analytics are related to [101 complaints](https://noyb.eu/en/101-complaints-eu-us-transfers-filed) filed by NGO noyb over data transfers. The EDPB set up a [task force](https://edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2020/european-data-protection-board-thirty-seventh-plenary-session-guidelines-controller_en) to coordinate the DPAs' approach on a European level.\n[^2]: The system will be accessible to anyone in the EU, because they enjoy data protection rights under the GDPR regardless of citizenship.\n[^3]: Proportionality is a specific notion under EU law and played an important role in the Schrems II decision. In this context, and as a rule of thumb, you can think of a measure (such as State surveillance) as proportionate when it is both necessary for a legitimate purpose, and not excessive. See Art. 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.\n",{"data":46},null,273,"First signs that Biden's EO on Data Transfers will be challenged","Baden-Württemberg State Commissioner criticized Biden's Exectuve Order on Data Tranfers","first-signs-that-bidens-eo-on-data-transfers-will-be-challenged","carlo-cilento","2022-11-14T00:00:00.000Z","2023-08-14T12:18:30.615Z",{"en":55,"de":56,"fr":58,"it":60,"es":62,"nl":64},{"slug":50},{"slug":57},"erste-anzeichen-dafuer-dass-bidens-eo-zur-datenuebermittlung-angefochten-werden-wird",{"slug":59},"premiers-signes-de-contestation-du-decret-de-biden-sur-les-transferts-de-donnees",{"slug":61},"primi-segnali-di-contestazione-della-legge-sui-trasferimenti-di-dati-di-biden",{"slug":63},"primeros-indicios-de-que-la-oe-de-biden-sobre-transferencias-de-datos-sera-impugnada",{"slug":65},"eerste-tekenen-dat-biden-s-eo-over-gegevensoverdrachten-zal-worden-aangevochten"]