Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012 ... k-password" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A 12-year-old Minnesota girl was reduced to tears while school officials and a police officer rummaged through her private Facebook postings after forcing her to surrender her password, an ACLU lawsuit alleges.

The claims are the latest in a string of tales showing that even password-protected, private online activities might not be safe from curious government agencies and schools.

The girl, whose identity is withheld in the lawsuit, came home "crying, depressed, angry, scared and embarrassed" after she was intimidated into divulging her login information by a school counselor and a deputy sheriff, who arrived in uniform, armed with a Taser, the lawsuit alleges.


"(The student now) fears that the school could make her give up her passwords at a moment's notice, at any time, for any reason," the lawsuit claims. It also alleges that password prying is standard practice at the Minnewaska Middle School, which the student still attends. "(Officials) have compelled other students to disclose their private information and have accessed students' online accounts on multiple occasions," it states.

Officials at the Minnewaska Area School District -- which is about 125 miles northwest of Minneapolis -- say the ACLU's version of events is "one-sided," and that the school acted to "prevent disruption," according to a statement e-mailed to msnbc.com by Superintendent Gregory Ohl.

"The district is confident that once all the facts come to light, the district's conduct will be found to be reasonable and appropriate," it said.
When asked if the district has obtained other students’ login information, he responded, “We feel this is not accurate.”
The lawsuit raises the complicated -- and quite unsettled -- legal quandary that balances students' constitutional rights with schools' needs to maintain order and a positive educational environment. For example, can schools punish students who publicly criticize school officials on their own time using social networks?

Federal district courts have handed down contradictory decisions on that issue. Facing a chance to settle the matter, the U.S. Supreme Court in January declined to hear three cases on the issue.

But private social media criticism, intended only for a limited audience behind a password or a privacy wall, raises a different legal issue, said Teresa Nelson, a lawyer for the ACLU in Minnesota.


Cheneyism run amok?

What if it happened to you, CID1990?






"What'd he find, Ron?"
"Oh, apparently, Jessica blew Tommy in the gym locker room, or something, and she posted her facial."

I'm not a big fan of the ACLU, but they are absolutely right on this one.

It's remarkable that the "right to privacy" identified by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade permits women to obtain abortions but doesn't extend to a 12-yr. old girl's refusal to divulge her password to a private social media network.

CitadelGrad wrote:I'm not a big fan of the ACLU, but they are absolutely right on this one.

It's remarkable that the "right to privacy" identified by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade permits women to obtain abortions but doesn't extend to a 12-yr. old girl's refusal to divulge her password to a private social media network.

Reproductive rights: A cornerstone of civilization.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:I'm not a big fan of the ACLU, but they are absolutely right on this one.

It's remarkable that the "right to privacy" identified by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade permits women to obtain abortions but doesn't extend to a 12-yr. old girl's refusal to divulge her password to a private social media network.

Reproductive rights: A cornerstone of civilization.

There's not much reproducing going on in abortions Clyde.

I think if they felt they have the rights to her Facebook info, they should have to obtain it from Facebook.

Cap'n Cat wrote:http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012 ... k-password

A 12-year-old Minnesota girl was reduced to tears while school officials and a police officer rummaged through her private Facebook postings after forcing her to surrender her password, an ACLU lawsuit alleges.

The claims are the latest in a string of tales showing that even password-protected, private online activities might not be safe from curious government agencies and schools.

The girl, whose identity is withheld in the lawsuit, came home "crying, depressed, angry, scared and embarrassed" after she was intimidated into divulging her login information by a school counselor and a deputy sheriff, who arrived in uniform, armed with a Taser, the lawsuit alleges.


"(The student now) fears that the school could make her give up her passwords at a moment's notice, at any time, for any reason," the lawsuit claims. It also alleges that password prying is standard practice at the Minnewaska Middle School, which the student still attends. "(Officials) have compelled other students to disclose their private information and have accessed students' online accounts on multiple occasions," it states.

Officials at the Minnewaska Area School District -- which is about 125 miles northwest of Minneapolis -- say the ACLU's version of events is "one-sided," and that the school acted to "prevent disruption," according to a statement e-mailed to msnbc.com by Superintendent Gregory Ohl.

"The district is confident that once all the facts come to light, the district's conduct will be found to be reasonable and appropriate," it said.
When asked if the district has obtained other students’ login information, he responded, “We feel this is not accurate.”
The lawsuit raises the complicated -- and quite unsettled -- legal quandary that balances students' constitutional rights with schools' needs to maintain order and a positive educational environment. For example, can schools punish students who publicly criticize school officials on their own time using social networks?

Federal district courts have handed down contradictory decisions on that issue. Facing a chance to settle the matter, the U.S. Supreme Court in January declined to hear three cases on the issue.

But private social media criticism, intended only for a limited audience behind a password or a privacy wall, raises a different legal issue, said Teresa Nelson, a lawyer for the ACLU in Minnesota.


Cheneyism run amok?

What if it happened to you, CID1990?






"What'd he find, Ron?"
"Oh, apparently, Jessica blew Tommy in the gym locker room, or something, and she posted her facial."

How "Progressive".

Things like this make me very irritated. I will make sure my youngest 2 girls know they have the right to remain silent and all they should say is, 'Call my parents". I am not the kind of parent that thinks their kid doesn't do anything wrong, most of you haven't met my kids. But your kids do deserve a fair shake and this doesn't sound like it was handled by the school well at all. The school is gonna end up with their tit in the ringer for it and rightfully so.

Baldy wrote:
How "Progressive".

My kids were instructed to have the school call me if they are ever called down to the office for anything, anything at all.

Wedgebuster wrote:My kids were instructed to have the school call me if they are ever called down to the office for anything, anything at all.

Our school does this for anything. Cap'n Cat's kids are pretty well-behaved.....so far.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Wedgebuster wrote:My kids were instructed to have the school call me if they are ever called down to the office for anything, anything at all.

Our school does this for anything. Cap'n Cat's kids are pretty well-behaved.....so far.

OR really good at getting away with it.

89Hen wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:
Our school does this for anything. Cap'n Cat's kids are pretty well-behaved.....so far.

OR really good at getting away with it.

That, too. There have been some close calls.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

89Hen wrote: OR really good at getting away with it.

That, too. There have been some close calls.

Better that they're smart about being dumb sometimes. Can save your ass in workplace.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:I'm not a big fan of the ACLU, but they are absolutely right on this one.

It's remarkable that the "right to privacy" identified by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade permits women to obtain abortions but doesn't extend to a 12-yr. old girl's refusal to divulge her password to a private social media network.

Reproductive rights: A cornerstone of civilization.

Property rights: THE cornerstone of civilization.

CitadelGrad wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Reproductive rights: A cornerstone of civilization.

Property rights: THE cornerstone of civilization.

I can dig that, Graddy.

We had a similar situation at the high school over here in G-Town. Someone created a facebook group called "sleeping students at GHS" in which it was a group dedicated to posting pictures of students asleep in class. The administration caught wind of this and instead decided to ban anyone on social networks during school. This was kind of unrealistic. One of my friends decided he'd test it and posted "Mrs. (principals' name) is a cunt. come and get me." suffice to say they got him. After much Hell raising, the administration backed off because there's absolutely no way of enforcing it without invading privacy or having a double standard.

Schools are dumb. They really shouldn't care if students text or are on social media websites unless they are distracting the class with these actions. But instead, they try to "fix" the problem or "teach a lesson" and really just make things more inconvenient for parents and students alike by having draconian punishments like taking your phone away for the rest of the year. All the while, some teacher don't even care if you text.

youngterrier wrote:We had a similar situation at the high school over here in G-Town. Someone created a facebook group called "sleeping students at GHS" in which it was a group dedicated to posting pictures of students asleep in class. The administration caught wind of this and instead decided to ban anyone on social networks during school. This was kind of unrealistic. One of my friends decided he'd test it and posted "Mrs. (principals' name) is a kitty. come and get me." suffice to say they got him. After much Hell raising, the administration backed off because there's absolutely no way of enforcing it without invading privacy or having a double standard.

Schools are dumb. They really shouldn't care if students text or are on social media websites unless they are distracting the class with these actions. But instead, they try to "fix" the problem or "teach a lesson" and really just make things more inconvenient for parents and students alike by having draconian punishments like taking your phone away for the rest of the year. All the while, some teacher don't even care if you text.

There's 2 ways they can enforce it:
-Handheld cell phone jammers- relatively inexpensive and radius of anywhere from 10-200 feet, depending on the model. Are illegal in the US (misdemeanor) but they are sold online, and are really starting to proliferate.
-Or simply say if during class they see a cell phone, hear a cell phone, they'll confiscate it, or send the student to the principals office.

Given that cell phones have pretty much replaced hiding answer lists up the sleeve or in the bathroom, BDK's solutions seem reasonable.

I rarely agree with Cappie on ANYTHING, but this seems to be one of those rare cases. School personnel were WAY out of bounds on this. Abuse of power, in my book. You call a parent-teacher-administrator conference before you do anything of this sort.