What Are the Parameters of the Right to Privacy?
There are a lot of rights covered in the Constitution and the Amendments, but the "right to privacy" is not one of them. Still, though there is no specific Amendment protecting a person's right to privacy, Americans expect that their private lives will remain just that; private. Understanding how this culture of expectation came about is important to knowing the parameters of the right to privacy.
Other People Are Reading
-
Significance
-
For many people, the idea of a "right" to privacy is as important as the right to free speech or freedom of religion. But the authors of the Constitution and its Amendments never framed a specific right to privacy for American citizens. That is not to say that there is no expectation of privacy for the average citizen; the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled on several occasions that, taken collectively, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th Amendments tot he Constitution constitute a "de facto," meaning "in fact" or "in reality," right to privacy.
Types
-
The First Amendment guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression. This means that the government can take no steps to bring harm (physical or legal) to a person for what they say, write, or express through art.
The Fourth Amendment guarantees freedom of association and the protection against unreasonable search and seizures. This means that no matter who a person associates with, they may not be brought into the court system without evidence of a criminal act.
The Fifth Amendment provides protection against self incrimination and the right to due process. This means that a person can not be forced to confess, nor can they be held in prison or jail indefinitely without formal charges that must proceed through a public court.
The Ninth Amendment is perhaps the most important to the "right to privacy" argument in that it states that rights not specifically outlined in the Constitution or its Amendments are vested (in other words, int he hands of) the people of the United States. This means that if public will holds that citizens can expect to lead private lives, that belief is held as sacred as a specific Amendment.
Finally, the Fourteenth Amendment extends Constitutional restrictions to the individual states and not just the federal government. -
Effects
-
Right to privacy arguments have been used in some of the most hotly-contested court cases before the Supreme Court. For instance, the Loving v. Virginia case against miscegenation (interracial marriages) laws instituted by the state of Virginia. In that case, the Supreme court ruled that the state had no authority to forbid marriages based on race an in addition to overturning Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924, also overturned all states' statutes against interracial marriage.
Perhaps the most controversial case which used the "de facto" right to privacy argument was the Roe v. Wade case in which abortion was no longer allowed to be regulated by states or municipalities because the law applied to a private medical procedure and not a public act.
Misconceptions
-
The right to privacy is not absolute, however, though many private citizens erroneously believe it to be. In some cases, most notably where the person become a "public personality" or "public persona," then their right to privacy can be null and void. For example, a politician voluntarily gives up a right to privacy when they run for office; their finances, past associations, and all personal details are open for public scrutiny. Similarly, a person who becomes an actor, musician, or artist can expect no right to privacy, including being photographed by the so-called "paparazzi" and details about intensely-personal issues such as addiction, sexual proclivities, and religious beliefs.
Warning
-
Private citizens can also expect to give their right to privacy away, even though they do not become a "public persona." For example, the use of a company's computer for personal email gives no guarantee of privacy. The Supreme Court has ruled that companies can regulate how their property is used, even for otherwise "private" communications. For example, just as an employer can have a policy of no private phone calls on the company telephones, they can likewise have a policy of no private emails on their computers and may read any and all emails that pass through its computer networks. The case of Bonita P. Bourke, et al. v. Nissan Motor Corporation in U.S.A. held that emails of a private and sexual nature that were sent over the company's system, and were intercepted, read, and used as evidence in terminations, was not a violation of privacy.
Also, a person may waive their right to privacy, even temporarily, in the process of searching or accepting a job. Such waivers are usually restricted to a so-called "background search" where a person's activities, references, and education are open for scrutiny. Jobs with security clearances are more in depth and may include a search of the person's finances, credit history, and divorce(s) (if applicable). In some positions, such as in intelligence, research or other sensitive positions, an employee should consider their right to privacy null and void.
-
