I disagree. Notre Dame and BYU are private institutions. Their students thus
have a right to privacy (i.e. not a public institution paid for with tax
dollars). It's not our business to know the dirty details of students who
chose to attend a private university.
Your argument that a student attending a public university has less of a right
to privacy then one attending a private university doesn't wash. Do you
also believe that students attending public K-12 schools have no privacy whereas
those who attend private schools do?
WinglishLehi, UTI disagree. Notre Dame and BYU are
private institutions. Their students thus have a right to privacy (i.e. not a
public institution paid for with tax dollars). ===Just
curious. Where is the right to privacy found?
WinglishThe Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is a federal freedom
of information law that allows for the full or partial disclosure of previously
unreleased information and documents controlled by the United States
government.The Federal FOIA should not be confused with the
different and varying individual state FOIA's. Many of those state acts may
be similar, but not identical to the federal act.FOIA's define
very specifically what information must be divulged and even public institutions
are not required to divulge private information about individual students
without a court order.
Veritas Aequitas,The 5th Ammendment in the Constitution protects
privilege against self-incrimination, which provides protection for the privacy
of personal information. In addition, the Ninth Amendment states that the
"enumeration of certain rights" in the Bill of Rights "shall not be
construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people."
Justice Goldberg interpreted the Ninth Amendment as justification for broadly
reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided
in the first eight amendments.
Only universities with high standards have problems. With the bar set so low,
most schools can overlook things.
WinglishLehi, UT===Nice copy, paste, and delete on the
"concurring" decision from the Griswold case.Fact is, it
only comes sparingly from SCOTUS. I do not believe Goldberg mentioned any of the
criteria that you mentioned. Had a private University "chosen" to
release that information, I sure they legally could without infringing on
anyone's rights.That being said, I am not an attorney, but I
slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
BradTo put it succinctly--BALONEY!But here is the
difference between you and me:You are taking the point of view of a
journalist who believes the public has a right to all the information that can
possibly be squeezed out of a story and I take the point of view as a human
being who values privacy.I still contend that all the public needs
to know is that the student's action or behavior was serious enough to
warrant a suspension from the team. That meets the school and coach's
obligation to the public. It is really none of our business to know any further
details.But I am happy to agree to disagree.
Veritus,You asked where the right to privacy is found. I provided
two sources: The Constitution of the United States and quotes with quotation
marks and a named source, Justice Goldberg of the Supreme Court, whose job it is
to interpret and apply the laws that govern our country. Again, you are the one
who asked for a source. The source and direct quotes were given. Call it a
copy and paste job if you want, but the source was cited. Do you want it in APA
format also? That you did not like the answer is irrelevant to the fact that
the American people have a right to privacy.Next, I don't care
whether the school is public or private. Whatever happened to minding
one's own beeswax? We simply do not need to know about every person's
indiscretions. I think the argument that we should know every player's
business is ridiculous.
Winglish,Not gonna argue with you. Just let's say the sources
you provided do not say people have a right to privacy. You quoted a biased
website, and left out the parts that don't support your arguement... Nice.Schools can release any information they choose to
about student athletes not playing. It's the schools choice.Americans do not have an absolute right to privacy. Same with speech,
religion, and press.
This is not about the legal technicalities of whether these player's
indiscretions can be disclosed. I seriously doubt any regulations or laws were
broken. The question is whether it is proper for these institutions to disclose
the nature of the violations. Clearly we can't expect the press to
suppress any information they receive that is interesting to their readership.
They'd give away the most sensitive national security secrets if they
learned about them.Institutions like BYU and Notre Dame cannot win
in these situations. If the violations are disclosed as they were, people whine
about right to privacy and disparage the institutions for giving more
information than was required. If they keep the details private, others whine
about them sweeping it under the rug to falsely advance the notion that the
institution has no problems.The details usually come out sooner or
later. Personally, I prefer the minimalist approach. Just say they've
violated team or school rules, and make it clear that if the student wants to
divulge more, they respect him enough to leave the disclosure of details in his
Well if the liberal press could find out what time a person passes gas,they
would print it too the press thinks that they have the right to tell everyone
every bodies business except their own,evert one in ameria has a right to