“The case is the first time the courts have addressed the privacy of wireless communications, and the high court's final decision could have far-reaching effects. The case is the first time the courts have addressed the privacy of wireless communications, and the high court's final decision could have far-reaching effects” (Kennedy, 2009)
It all started when a Sergeant Jeff Quon sent steamy sexual text messages to his mistress and to then wife. The officer was engaging in what was considered sexting with the dispatcher, and sending personal messages to his wife. The problem was discovered when his supervisor saw that he had passed the limit of text messages and brought it to attention. His boss read some of the steamy texts that were sent back in fourth and Quon felt his 4th amendment was being violated, and this was an invasion of privacy. Quon took this to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, and they ruled he could keep his texts private as long as he pays what he goes over on his texts. Lt Steve was tired of being the one always figuring out what his balance was after his limits so he did a formal complain to the police chief. Then they changed their mind and printed a transcript of his messages. This all very controversial because the privacy issue is being brought up. First point the pager did not belong to him it belonged to the government. Second point is this was allowed to continue as long as he paid the rover draft on extra messages. The police department changed their mind and investigated the situation more thoroughly going through his personal messages.
Geography: This places a huge role in this problem because we need to find out if Quon was texting while he was on duty. Did any of these texts implied to meet somewhere while on duty .If the sergeant was suppose to be on duty then he was violating a lot of rules. The location is very important because this man is being paid to be working not texting his mistress.
Government: The main person who has the say in this mess is the court. Using property that is government owned to your personal use is mot acceptable. The pager was given to him solely for work related issues not personal. The Sergeant could have sent his messages with his own personal phone if he wanted to keep it private. The 9th circuit U.S court ruled that he could keep messages in private without anyone reading them.
Economic: How much money does Quon owe to the police department? Should he be responsible on paying the whole bill instead of partial because he misused the pager to his personal use? The court will have to decide whether he would have to back pay all the other months he passed his limits and what is fair.
Political Science: Who has the right to search Quons texts messages? Should his supervisor be allowed to read these sexual explicit texts? If his supervisor is not allowed to read texts, then who has the power here to read Quons texts messages, and check if they are work related? Did the court’s ruling have that final say on this matter? Lt. Steve duke was tired of being someone’s personal auditor that he complained to the chief, and did he have the right to complain for this matter? Does Quon have any rights after he violated the use of his pager? Should the text messages be private or public, since did this involve a form of adultery? My personal opinion is that this it is a more political and personal because we have two angry men. One man is tired of checking up on Quons overdraft fees and Quon is the man who wants to be private and discrete.
Law: Is Quons fourth amendment being violated. Here we have a case where one man feels his text should be private and no one should be allowed to read them. He is concern that they violated his rights by searching and obtaining transcripts of his text messages without his consent. The law gave Quon the right to keep his text messages private but police department printed them and read them. I believe no matter how wrong Quons texts messages were he had the right to keep them private. Quon had gone to court and was granted his right to keep them private. Quon has had his right violated by the police department in my opinion .Now on the other side he did violate the use of property owned by his employer, and government. If Quon had signed a disclaimer stating that the pager was only to be used for work related then I believe he lost his rights when he violated the contract. However the contract he signs did not specifically state anything about text messages.
In conclusion the Supreme Court ruled that the police department did not violate Quon’s 4th amendment and they had every right to search through two months worth of texting.
“A California police department did not violate the constitutional privacy rights of an employee when it audited the text messages on a pager the city had issued him, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Thursday.” (Liptak, 2010)
DISCLAIMER: This blog is an assignment for an Interdisciplinary Studies course at National University. It is not a real blog
Reference List
Kennedy, H. (2009, December 14). Supreme Court to Decide if boss can read employess text messages in Sgt. Jeff Quon sexting case. Daily News .Retrieved June 26, 2010, from www.nydailynews.com: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/12/14/2009-12-14_supreme_court_to_hear_case_.html
Liptak, A. (2010, June 17). Justices Allow Search of Work-Issued Pager. New York Times . Retrieved June 26, 2010, from www.nytimes.com: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/18/us/18scotus.html?scp=1&sq=Jeff%20Quon&st=cse
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment