Alan Westin and the US Constitution on Privacy

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Alan Westin identifies four primary functions of privacy: personal autonomy, emotional release, self-evaluation, and limited and protected communication. The first one refers to how privacy is central to maintaining ones sense of individuality (Halbert & Inguilli, 2014). Emotional release means the individuals need to relieve themselves of the psychological stress that is inseparable from living n a society for which privacy is also indispensable (Halbert & Inguilli, 2014). Privacy is also important for self-evaluation because it is often a preliminary condition for a thorough self-reflection (Halbert & Inguilli, 2014). As for limited and protected communication, privacy is essential for allowing people to share sensitive information only with those they want instead of everyone.

The Constitution does not mention the right to privacy explicitly. The position of the Supreme Court in this regard is roughly consistent with this in the sense that it does not focus on privacy per se. For example, in City of Ontario v. Quon, the Supreme Court was only concerned with privacy insofar as it related to the permissibility of a governmental search of text messages (Halbert & Inguilli, 2014). In other words, the court did not outline a specific right to privacy but merely elaborated on the technicalities of allowing a search on a directly relevant constitutional basis. Hence, to the extent that the Supreme Court finds privacy in the Constitution, it is justified in doing so.

Westin and the Supreme Court generally coincide in their view of privacy. In Riley v. California, the court stated that searching a cell phone without a warrant is illegal and recognized the swiftly increasing value of digital devices to peoples identities (Halbert & Inguilli, 2014). The importance of being secure in ones digital communication corresponds directly to Westins function of limited and protected communication. Similarly, the amount of personal information stored on an average cellphone can make it an important component of the extended self, making it valuable for both personal autonomy and self-reflation. Thus, the Supreme Courts position on privacy implicitly recognizes the value of privacy functions as defined by Westin.

Reference

Halbert, T., & Inguilli, E. (2014). Law and ethics in the business environment (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!