By Wendy Beetlestone
Special to the Legal
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a school board member's claim that she had a Fourteenth Amendment right to privacy of opinions she shared in an investigation into an illicit relationship between a teacher and a minor student.
Karen Malleus shared with investigators her view that the student had a vivid imagination and a history of exaggeration, but only after she was assured by the district's lawyer and the school board that any report would remain confidential. In fact, the report was leaked to the press.
Malleus sued, claiming that she had a constitutionally protected expectation of privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment because her opinions had been shared for a limited purpose and with the expectation that they would remain private.
The 3rd Circuit rejected her argument. It surveyed 3rd Circuit jurisprudence, which traditionally has protected only two types of privacy rights -- the right to confidentiality and the right to autonomy.
The right to confidentiality is limited to an individual's interest in not disclosing intimate facts about him or herself. In other words, it is "the right to be let alone." In this case, even though Malleus intended to share her opinion with a limited audience, she nevertheless volunteered it to others. Furthermore, the opinion she shared was about others and did not concern intimate information (such as sexual, medical or financial facts) about herself.
Neither had she stated a right to autonomy, which focuses on protecting independence in personal decision-making in matters relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships and parental child rearing.
The 3rd Circuit held that the decision of a school board member to participate in an investigation into how a sexual assault investigation had been handled, while an important matter, does not implicate those types of interests.
Malleus contended that the 3rd Circuit should adopt a third category of privacy. More specifically, she proposed that if someone shares an opinion with the expectation that it will be kept secret, the opinion must be kept confidential. The 3rd Circuit rejected the proposal: it had not previously recognized this as a protected category under the Fourteenth Amendment and declined to do so in this case.
Wendy Beetlestone is a shareholder at Hangley Aronchick Segal & Pudlin, where she is chair of the firm's education practice group. She can be reached at [email protected].
Comments