Term Paper on "Privacy Rights"

Term Paper 15 pages (6316 words) Sources: 1+

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Privacy Rights

In the case of Wilson vs. Layne that was argued in March 24, 1999, and was decided in May 24, 1999, the privacy rights of the citizen, Charles Wilson were challenged when he was interacting with the police, and he was filmed during the act by the media. In fact, Charles Wilson challenged the constitutionality of the arrest procedure that was conducted on his own son by the federal and the state authorities. His claim was that the police had in fact invited the 'media ride-alongs' to watch the fun, so to speak, when the officers would produce their arrest warrant, and when they would subsequently arrest the son. Charles was of the opinion that the officials had violated his Fourth Amendment Rights completely. On appeal, from an adverse District Court rule, the Court of Appeals, although it did deny the officers' immunity, chose not to answer the question about the violation of the Fourth Amendment, and this was because of the fact that no previous case had addressed this issue, and therefore, there was no prior pronouncement on that subject. (Wilson vs. Layne, 526 U.S. 303, (1999))

When the appeal was sent to the Supreme Court, the Court granted Charles the 'certiorari'. The case of Wilson vs. Layne gave rise to the question of whether or not when federal and state officials issue an arrest warrant to a citizen, either at his home or elsewhere, can they allow the media to accompany them on their official duty? And would such an arrest warrant, when it is issued at the home of the individual, be considered to be a violation of a homeowner's Fourth Amendment protection as under 'unlawful search and seizure'? In this particular case, the Court held the ruling that if the media were to be present during the execution of an arrest warrant, then it was to be considered that it was in no way at all related to what the officials were doing during their course of work. The media dose in no way assist the officials, and in the same manner, they have nothing whatsoever to do with the execution of the arrest warrant.

In addition, the connection between the presence of the media, and the furthering of the positive publicity for officers doing their duties because of their presence was not at all clear, and the ruling of the Court was that in this case, the officers did not have any clear idea that it would be considered illegal in any way if they permitted the media to accompany them on their visit to Charles Wilson's house in order to issue an arrest warrant to his son. No prior rule existed in this matter, stated the Court, and therefore, there was nothing wrong in the media accompanying the officials during the course of their duty. Therefore, the Court said, the officials would be granted 'qualified immunity' in this case. (Wilson vs. Layne, 526 U.S. 303, (1999))

The Supreme Court ruled that the entry of the media into a home when officials were searching for a suspect did in fact violate the Fourth Amendment, and in this particular case, of Wilson vs. Layne, when the officials concerned were in the process of executing a search warrant, a reporter from Washington Post, and a photographer, who had both been invited to come along on this official duty, observed, undisturbed, five officials enter the home of in search of a suspect. The suspect was not at home, but his father was, and the father in question happened to be clad in his underwear. Mistaking this poor man for a suspect, the officers pinned him to the ground, and quick enough, the photographer clicked away numerous photographs of this scene. Hearing the commotion, the man's wife, Clad in a nightgown, appeared in the room, and photographs were taken of her as well. Although none of the photographs were published, the fact is that they were taken, and this was a blatant invasion of privacy. (Ad Idem, Wilson vs. Layne) The warrant had in fact made absolutely no mention of the 'media ride along' that had accompanied the officers during their duties.

In addition, the officers happened to enter the home very early in the morning, and this resulted in the confrontation that happened with the petitioners, and the protective sweep carried out ascertained the fact that the son, who was a suspect, was indeed not in the house. Although the reporters and the photographer were indeed present at the scene, they quietly observed what was happening, and did not interfere, in any manner, with the execution of the arrest warrant, and even later, the newspapers did not publish those photographs that had been taken at the scene. The petitioners sued the officers under 'Bivens vs. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents', and stated that the officers' actions in bringing the media to observe and to record the execution of the arrest warrant was basically against their rights under the 'Fourth Amendment'. Subsequently, the District Court denied the respondents' motion for 'summary judgment based on qualified immunity'. (Supreme Court Collection: WILSON V. LAYNE (98-83) 526 U.S. 603 (1999) 141 F.3d 111, affirmed)

However, during reversal, the Court of Appeals found itself unable to decide whether what the officers had done was indeed a violation of the Fourth Amendment, and concluded that because such a thing had not been filed in any court of law before, and because no judgment had been passed about whether the presence of the media during the issue of a search warrant or an arrest warrant by police officers was a violation of the Fourth Amendment, the particular right that had been violated had not been 'clearly established', and therefore, the respondents were entitled for a 'qualified immunity' in this case of Wilson vs. Layne.

In a similar manner, the phenomenon of a 'media ride-along' had not been brought to the notice of any court of law before, and although it was true that a media ride-along was indeed a violation of the Fourth Amendment, since the law was not exactly clear on the subject, and because there was no precedent, and that the fact was not clear at the time when the media did enter the petitioner's home, the official could be granted 'qualified immunity'. This qualified immunity analysis was the very same as that which had been awarded in the case of a few other cases like, for example, Graham vs. Connor, and Bivens. It was also pointed out that, under the Fourth Amendment, it was a blatant violation of a homeowner's right if the officers who were supposed to issue a warrant to the homeowner happened to invite either the media or any other third party who had absolutely nothing at all to do with the warrant, and they were not in aid of the warrant, too. (Supreme Court Collection: WILSON V. LAYNE (98-83) 526 U.S. 603 (1999) 141 F.3d 111, affirmed)

The Fourth Amendment, therefore, embodies the age-old principle of respect for the privacy of the home, and even though officers of the law are allowed to enter a home if required to issue a warrant of any kind, it does not necessarily mean that they are entitled to bring with them a group of persons or a single person into the privacy of an individual's home, when issuing the warrant. In this case, the presence of the media, in the form of the photographer and another individual, did nothing to aid the issue of the 'authorized intrusion', which was for the purpose of issuing the warrant for the petitioner's son. The respondents were able to quote several reasons for the presence of the media during the entry of the Wilson home, and these were: to publicize the various efforts being taken by the government to fight crime, to make the accurate and exact recording and reporting of the various law enforcement activities being carried out, to minimize, as far as possible, police abuse, and to 'protect' both the suspects as well as the police officers.

All these justifications and reasons come close to actually justifying the presence of media ride-alongs, and although it may be possible, in some cases, to justify the presence of a third party, in this particular case, the presence of the media cannot be justified. In addition, it was found that the Fourth Amendment Right of the petitioner was not established clearly at the time of the entry, and here, 'clearly established' means that the basic contours of the Right must be clear to such an extent that the officer in charge would be able to comprehend what exactly he is doing that is not within that Right. In other words, although his actions may not have been held unlawful, but when seen in the light of a previously existing law, its very unlawfulness would become apparent and obvious. (Supreme Court Collection: WILSON V. LAYNE (98-83) 526 U.S. 603 (1999) 141 F.3d 111, affirmed)

In… READ MORE

How to Reference "Privacy Rights" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

Physical Privacy Rights Term Paper

Ethics

Privacy Rights in the Workplace

This paper analyzes business ethics in the workplace. Specifically, it identifiesa basic physical privacy right issue at Harrah's casino in Reno, Nevada.

In July… read more

Term Paper 3 pages (1088 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Career / Labor / Human Resources

---

7 Public Health Versus Privacy Rights HIV Testing and AIDS Intervention Case Study

Public Health vs. Privacy Rights: HIV Testing and AIDS Intervention

Case #7

What's the story? What "circumstances of the action" and "conditions of the agents" should be kept especially in… read more

Case Study 2 pages (580 words) Sources: 1 Style: APA Topic: Disease / Virus / Disorder / Injury

---

Regulating Internet Privacy Research Paper

Regulating Internet Policy

Regulating Internet Privacy

The paper provides the annotated bibliography of the three articles. The paper also provides the reflections on experience, opinions, attitudes and feelings with regard… read more

Research Paper 3 pages (957 words) Sources: 0 Topic: Computers / IT / Internet

---

Biometric Information Systems and Privacy Rights Essay

Biometric Information Systems and Privacy Rights

Biometric information systems are systems that cover a wide range of technologies for technologies that can be used to verify the identity of individuals… read more

Essay 4 pages (1381 words) Sources: 8 Topic: Computers / IT / Internet

---

Privacy Laws Are a Big Research Paper

Privacy laws are a big part of Business Administration in ensuring the business is in compliance with law and ensuring the privacy of sensitive information, both for customers and employees.… read more

Research Paper 6 pages (1816 words) Sources: 2 Topic: Business / Corporations / E-commerce

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>