Supreme Court Ruling on Privacy of Texting

Ok, so here is an article that was sent to my cellular phone since I have subscribed to The Washington Post.  I find it interesting especially since it is one of the more recent topics we have discussed in class and this is a recent case (Ontario vs. Quon).  Here it is:

Looks like a federal appeals court in California ruled that a police officer in the city of Ontario had the right to privacy on a "department-issued" cellular phone.  What sparked the case was when the officer's chief read sexually explicit text messages that were sent to the officer's girlfriend.  The officer argued more that the chief discovering the messages was violation of protections against unreasonable searches.  Now based on the article, I don't believe the officer was fired.  I do think he was more so embarrassed.  And evidence showed that in a month the officer's phone had 57 of 450 messages that were work related.  Now the supreme court is set to rule whether or not employees have privacy when using devices owned by employer.

I think as long as anything is company or department issued, whether it be an computer, email account, cell phone, that who ever is in charge of that has the right to see how the devices are being used.  If it is inappropriate, the person should be warned or there should be a consequence policy in place.  I feel like if the officer wanted to be nasty with his text messages, he should have use his own phone....not the department phone.  Anything work issued, should be used for work only.

Any thought?  Check out the link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/14/AR2009121403689.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

If you have trouble checking out the link, go to The Washington Post website and search "Court to rule on privacy of texting" or look up the case Ontario vs. Quon.