• Bankrupt 23andMe will be allowed to sell customers’ genetic data to other companies. The company claims its security measures surrounding the data will remain in place, but its privacy policy says it can change those procedures at any time. 23andMe customers do have a way to delete their genetic and ancestral data, however.

A U.S. bankruptcy judge ruled DNA-testing company 23andMe, which filed for bankruptcy Sunday,  has the right to sell customers’ medical and ancestry data to potential bidders. Offers will be due on May 7, and a final hearing will be held in June.

Once the hottest start-up in Silicon Valley, shares for the San Francisco-based company soared as much as 158% on Thursday. Investors see the sensitive data of 23andMe’s 15 million customers as the company’s most valuable asset.

After 23andMe set hurried deadlines for potential bidders, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Brian C. Walsh later delayed those dates by two weeks to gratify his schedule as well as to allow creditors a chance to evaluate before the court arrives at a decision. 

While genetic data of 23andMe’s customers will be up for grabs, the company says security measures will remain in place surrounding customer data. The company will continue to be “transparent about the management of user data going forward, and data privacy will be an important consideration in any potential transaction,” board chairman Mark Jensen said in a statement. 

According to the company’s privacy policy, in a bankruptcy, merger, or acquisition, sensitive customer data will carry the same contingencies, but the policy also mentions that these procedures can be changed at will.

“There’s health insurance companies that are interested in this data, there’s life insurance companies that are interested in this data,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta told ABC News7 earlier this week.

How to delete your data

While 23andMe claims user data will remain protected, the company also allows users to wipe their data from the platform. Here’s how to do it.

Once logged into your account, toggle over to the “Settings” portion of your profile. Find the “23andMe” data section located at the bottom of the page, then click “view.” Users can opt to download their data at this stage. Then, users can scroll to the “Delete Data” section and select the “Permanently Delete Data” option. 23andMe will make users confirm their request via email, and once more through a link. 

Customers who have chosen to have saliva samples preserved by 23andMe previously can request they be discarded via the settings page under “Preferences.” Additionally, if a user has allowed their data from 23andMe to be used by third-party researchers, they can withdraw their consent within the setting page under “Research and Product Consents.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

A U.S. judge in Washington state has blocked enforcement of President Donald Trump’s order banning transgender people from serving in the military, the second nationwide injunction against the policy in as many weeks.

The order Thursday from U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma came in a case brought by several long-serving transgender military members who say the ban is insulting and discriminatory, and that their firing would cause lasting damage to their careers and reputations.

In his 65-page ruling, Settle — an appointee of former President George W. Bush and a former captain in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General Corps — said the administration offered no explanation as to why transgender troops, who have been able to serve openly over the past four years with no evidence of problems, should suddenly be banned.

“The government’s arguments are not persuasive, and it is not an especially close question on this record,” Settle wrote. “The government’s unrelenting reliance on deference to military judgment is unjustified in the absence of any evidence supporting ‘the military’s’ new judgment reflected in the Military Ban.”

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington, D.C., similarly issued an order blocking the policy last week but then put her own ruling temporarily on hold pending the government’s appeal. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia late Thursday told the parties that it would consider putting the ruling into effect if “any action occurs that negatively impacts” transgender service members.

In a more limited ruling on Monday, a judge in New Jersey barred the Air Force from removing two transgender men, saying they showed their separation would cause lasting damage to their careers and reputations that no monetary settlement could repair.

Trump signed an executive order Jan. 27 that claims the sexual identity of transgender service members “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life” and is harmful to military readiness.

In response, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy that presumptively disqualifies transgender people from military service.

“They can do the right number of pullups. They can do the right amount of pushups. They can shoot straight,” Sasha Buchert, an attorney with the civil rights law firm Lambda Legal, said after arguments Monday in Tacoma. “Yet, they’re being told they have to leave the military simply because of who they are.”

Those challenging the policy and Trump’s executive order in Tacoma include Gender Justice League, which counts transgender troops among its members, and several transgender members of the military. Among them is U.S. Navy Cmdr. Emily “Hawking” Shilling, a 42-year-old woman who has served for more than 19 years, including 60 missions as a combat aviator in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In his ruling, Settle highlighted her case.

“There is no claim and no evidence that she is now, or ever was, a detriment to her unit’s cohesion, or to the military’s lethality or readiness, or that she is mentally or physically unable to continue her service,” he wrote. “There is no claim and no evidence that Shilling herself is dishonest or selfish, or that she lacks humility or integrity. Yet absent an injunction, she will be promptly discharged solely because she is transgender.”

During arguments Monday, Justice Department lawyer Jason Lynch insisted that the president was entitled to deference in military affairs and suggested the service ban was not as broad as the plaintiffs had suggested.

The judge peppered Lynch with questions, noting that the government had offered no evidence that allowing transgender troops to serve openly had caused any problems for military readiness.

Thousands of transgender people serve in the military, but they represent less than 1% of the total number of active-duty service members.

In 2016, a Defense Department policy permitted transgender people to serve openly in the military. During Trump’s first term in the White House, the Republican issued a directive to ban transgender service members, with an exception for some of those who had already started transitioning under more lenient rules that were in effect during the Obama administration. The Supreme Court allowed that ban to take effect. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, scrapped it when he took office.

The rules imposed by Hegseth include no such exceptions.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Source link

Source link