Safe for Work? Analyzing the Supreme Court's Standard of Privacy for Government Employees in Light of City of Ontario v. Quon

• Author: Sheila A. Bentzen
• Position: J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2012
• Pages: 1283-1304

1283

Safe for Work? Analyzing the Supreme

Court’s Standard of Privacy for

Government Employees in Light of City of

Ontario v. Quon

Sheila A. Bentzen

ABSTRACT: This Note analyzes the need for the Supreme Court to develop

a constitutional standard for determining whether a government search of a

public employee is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Specifically,

this Note stresses that the test needs to take into account emerging technology

and its impact on public employees’ privacy rights. To properly ground these

issues in current law, this Note explores them through the lens of the

Supreme Court’s two major opinions related to government searches of its

employees—O’Connor v. Ortega and City of Ontario v. Quon. The

Note demonstrates that the Supreme Court has yet to produce a standard

that adequately protects the privacy interests of public employees. To fill this

gap in the law, this Note proposes a balancing test that weighs the interests

of both the government employer and the government employee. The test does

so by considering the extent to which an employee’s work-related activity

carries over into the private sphere of the home.

I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1285

II. DEFINING THE SCOPE OF A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE’S PRIVACY

RIGHTS: A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE LAW ............................................ 1286

A. O’CONNOR V. ORTEGA AND PRIVACY RIGHTS BEFORE QUON ........ 1287

1. The Plurality’s Balancing Test ............................................. 1288

2. Justice Scalia’s Concurrence and the Presumption of

Reasonableness Standard .................................................... 1289

3. Circuit Court Treatment of Public Employee Privacy

Rights Under O’Connor ........................................................ 1289

B. PRIVACY LAW TODAY ...................................................................... 1290

 J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2012; B.A., University of

Nebraska, 2009. I thank the editorial board and student writers of Volume 97 for their hard

work and assistance in editing this Note.

1284 IOWA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 97:1283

III. THE NEED FOR A BROADER HOLDING DEFINING GOVERNMENT

EMPLOYEES’ PRIVACY RIGHTS .............................................................. 1291

A. THE NEED TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO LOWER COURTS .................... 1292

B. TECHNOLOGICAL REALITIES OF THE MODERN WORKPLACE .............. 1293

IV. A NEW TEST TO EVALUATE PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PRIVACY RIGHTS ........ 1295

A. BALANCING TESTS AND LOWER COURT CONFUSION .......................... 1296

B. WEIGHING GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES’ PRIVACY INTERESTS .............. 1297

1. Privacy Expectations ............................................................. 1298

2. Reasonableness of the Search ............................................. 1301

C. QUON REVISITED ........................................................................... 1302

VI. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 1303