Sunday, July 1, 2007

If privacy is so important, why didn’t our founding fathers write it into the constitution or the bill or rights?

Ok, let’s start the way all my favorite folks started, by answering a question with a question. That question is, “How many of our founding fathers signed the original Declaration of Independence?” Seems simple right? After all we’ve seen that document with that big John Hancock signature at the bottom. But how many of them signed the original document? The question is a bit of a trick, since we know there is a huge list (56) of them that eventually signed it. The trick is that they signed it in August after the first draft was distributed (the original was only signed by two people). Why? Well for one, because signing such a document would be considered an act of treason and as Benjamin Franklin reminded those at the signing that,”We must all hang together, or we shall surely hang separately.” The privacy and anonymity of their thoughts and speech was clearly something that was top of mind for these men.

The Supreme Court has referred to a right of privacy on many occasions and in most of these, the fourth amendment is the usual starting point. For those that are trying to remember their civics lessons, that’s the one that says that you should be protected from unreasonable search and seizure (technically this only applied to the federal government but the 14th amendment expanded this to protection from state’s governments as well).

This is where it gets much grayer. Some people view the fourth amendment as meaning what it says with not logical extrapolation or allowances for changes in technology. Others feel that this expresses intent and should expand to encompass new technologies and realities. The Supreme court over the years has expressed opinions ranging the gambit on this issue so it is safe to say that this is an undecided issue (as an aside, Row V. Wade is actually based on a right to privacy). Thus, this is where the debate about whether we have a right to privacy or not, and to what extent it goes comes from. In later blogs we will look at what this means from the standpoint of private citizens and corporations (which the law treats as citizens).

No comments: