Mann -vs- ATI case–unsettled

klem says:
April 18, 2012 at 5:33 am
I do not want Mann’s emails made public. And I’m not sure I would trust a judge to decide which ones are too private. This is an invasion of privacy, I think we are treading on thin ice here…..
________________________
Sorry dude, that issue was addressed a long, long time ago. Invasion of privacy, only refers to you home PERIOD. That is why Monsanto was allowed to trespass on farmers fields and collect evidence that was then used to sue farmers. It is also why PETA can trespass a half mile down your private drive and into your backyard and get photos to take you to court. (My neighbor)
(Why is the “CHANGE” alway in 1970’s or thereabouts?)

Katz v. United States
….As the Court’s opinion states, “the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places.” The question, however, is what protection it affords to those people. Generally, as here, the answer to that question requires reference to a “place.” My understanding of the rule that has emerged from prior decisions is that there is a twofold requirement, first that a person have exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy and, second, that the expectation be one that society is prepared to recognize as “reasonable.” Thus, a man’s home is, for most purposes, a place here he expects privacy, but objects, activities, or statements that he exposes to the “plain view” of outsiders are not “protected,” because no intention to keep them to himself has been exhibited. On the other hand, conversations in the open would not be protected against being overheard, for the expectation of privacy under the circumstances would be unreasonable….

Most employers make it very clear that there is not “expectation of privacy” at work. As a lab manager I have had my telephone conversations monitored and my e-mails read as a matter of company policy. I might not like it but it is expected in this modern age. The existence of FOIA (July 4, 1966) makes it just as clear to government employees that there is no “expectation of privacy” at their place of work either.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
The U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is a law ensuring public access to U.S. government records. FOIA carries a presumption of disclosure; the burden is on the government – not the public – to substantiate why information may not be released. Upon written request, agencies of the United States government are required to disclose those records, unless they can be lawfully withheld from disclosure under one of nine specific exemptions in the FOIA. This right of access is ultimately enforceable in federal court.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foia.html

VIRGINA (See: The full text of the Freedom of Information Act in a form showing all amendments to the statute made by the “Openness Promotes Effectiveness in our National Government Act of 2007.” )

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provides that any person has a right of access to Federal agency records, except to the extent that such records are protected from release by a FOIA exemption or a special law enforcement record exclusion. It is VA’s policy to release information to the fullest extent under the law.

A Judge have already ruled that the University of Virgina is not a “corporation” or a person but a government entity. (See: http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/mar/02/11/va-supreme-court-rules-against-cuccinelli-uva-clim-ar-1735035/ )