A few years of ordinary life
Think about your dealings with government over a few years. You renew a driver's license, file taxes, register a car, apply for a permit, enroll a child in school, perhaps use Medicaid or unemployment insurance. Each step requires personal information, and you have no real choice about providing it.
Each of those transactions feeds a database. In modern integrated systems, those databases talk to each other. The result can be a profile of your identity, finances, family, health, property and movements, assembled without a court order, governed by administrative policy rather than law, and visible to officials and contractors you will never meet.
The danger is the capability, not only the misuse
Most rules ask whether someone misused your information after the fact. By then, the power already exists. A system that can assemble a profile of anyone will be asked to, by the next administration, the next emergency, or the next contractor. In 2026 the Supreme Court described this kind of power as a "virtual panopticon." The Court named the danger; it cannot redesign the systems.
Why government is held to a higher standard
- You cannot opt out. You cannot choose a different tax authority or take your license business to another state.
- Government cannot go out of business. A company that abuses data can lose customers. An agency faces no market check. The only check is the Constitution.
- The stakes are higher. Government data can lead to denied benefits, lost custody, audits or prosecution, based on records you never authorized for that use.
The double standard
Many states now require companies to limit what they collect, use data only for stated purposes and let people see and correct their records. The same laws often exempt government agencies. California's consumer privacy law does not apply to state agencies. If those standards are right for commerce, they are certainly right for government, which holds more data, under greater authority, with less accountability than any company.