Constitutional Law

Text Messaging Protection Against Surveillance

Published on: March 10, 2010 | by Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh

Is text-messaging protected against surveillance by an employer? Currently, it is if the employer is a governmental entity. But for how long? The Supreme Court recently agreed to review the Ninth Circuit’s panel opinion in Quon v. Arch Wireless, 529 F.3d 892 (9th Cir. 2008), cert. granted sub. nom. City of Ontario v. Quon, ___ U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1011, 175 L.Ed.2d 617 (Dec. 14, 2009).

The central issue in Quon was whether a policeman who was issued a text message pager by the city for police business had a reasonable expectation that his personal messages sent over the pager would remain private. The city argued that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in personal messages, because it had a written policy that personal use of city computer equipment and software for personal use was considered a violation of city policy, and that use of the Internet and the email system outside the course of business was expressly deemed not confidential. Quon had acknowledged in writing having read the policy. Quon had also been informed that text messages were considered email and would be subject to audit.

The Ninth Circuit disagreed and found Quon did have a reasonable expectation of privacy in personal messages, on the ground that the foregoing city policy was not actually followed. Officer Quon’s immediate superior had told Quon that, if Quon paid for overruns on his monthly allotment of characters, his text messages would not be audited. But in the fullness of time, Officer Quon’s messages were audited when he continued to exceed his monthly limit, and it was discovered that many of his text messages were personal. Officer Quon sued, alleging that the police department and City employees who reviewed the text messages violated Quon’s rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and similar provisions of the California constitution. The District Court and the Ninth Circuit found that Officer Quon was entitled to rely on his superior’s assurances that his text messages would remain private on the conditions stated.

Student’s Online Speech is Protected by the First Amendment

Published on: February 16, 2010 | by Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh

PEMBROKE PINES, Fla. — A student who set up a Facebook page to complain about her teacher – and was later suspended – had every right to do so under the First Amendment, a federal magistrate has ruled.

The ruling not only allows Katherine “Katie” Evans’ suit against the principal to move forward, it could set a precedent in cases involving speech and social networking on the Internet, experts say.

The courts are in the early stages of exploring the limits of free speech within social networking, said Howard Simon, the executive director of the Florida ACLU, which filed the suit on Evans’ behalf.

Supreme Court grants unlimited corporate spending on elections

Published on: January 29, 2010 | by Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh

On January 22, 2010, the Supreme Court of the United States granted unlimited corporate spending on elections. The justices overturn a century of U.S. electoral law by a 5-4 vote. Millions of extra dollars are expected to start flowing from big business to Republican candidates.

Overturning a century-old restriction, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that corporations may spend as much as they want to sway voters in federal elections.

In a landmark 5-4 decision, the court’s conservative bloc said that corporations have the same right to free speech as individuals and, for that reason, the government may not stop corporations from spending to help their favored candidates.

Hillary Clinton On Internet Freedom

Published on: January 21, 2010 | by Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

The Newseum, Washington, D.C.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much, Alberto, for not only that kind introduction but you and your colleagues’ leadership of this important institution. It’s a pleasure to be here at the Newseum. The Newseum is a monument to some of our most precious freedoms, and I’m grateful for this opportunity to discuss how those freedoms apply to the challenges of the 21st century.

US court mulls ‘sexting’: Child porn or free speech

Published on: January 15, 2010 | by Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh

PHILADELPHIA (AP) – A federal appeals court must decide whether “sexting” by three Pennsylvania teens amounts to child pornography or is a free-speech right.

A three-judge panel in Philadelphia is hearing arguments Friday in a case between a county prosecutor and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The prosecutor is threatening to file child-pornography charges against three girls after racy cell-phone images of them circulated through their high school. The photos show one girl topless and the others in bras.

Reno v. ACLU: U.S. Supreme Court Finds Disputed Provisions of Communications Decency Act Unconstitutional

Published on: January 13, 2010 | by Law Offices of Salar Atrizadeh

On June 26, 1997, in the first Internet-related U.S. Supreme Court case ever to be decided, seven justices found the disputed provisions of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court, and was joined by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy, Scalia, Souter, and Thomas. Justice O’Connor filed a separate opinion, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, concurring in the decision but dissenting in part.

Decision Highlights:

The opinion was a ringing endorsement of the Internet as a “dramatic” and “unique” “marketplace of ideas.”