Supreme Court: Privacy? Not on the Company’s Phone

What's Hot

23 Upgrades Under $50 to Make Your House Look AwesomeAround The House

Trump Worth $10 Billion Less Than If He’d Simply Invested in Index FundsBusiness

Do This or Your iPhone Bill May SkyrocketSave

11 Places in the World Where You Can Afford to Retire in StyleMore

19 Moves That Will Help You Retire Early and in StyleFamily

What You Need to Know for 2017 Obamacare EnrollmentFamily

8 Things Rich People Buy That Make Them Look DumbAround The House

50 Ways to Make a Fast $50 (or Lots More)Grow

32 of the Highest-Paid American SpeakersMake

The 35 Two-Year Colleges That Produce the Highest EarnersCollege

5 DIY Ways to Make Your Car Smell GreatCars

Amazon Prime No Longer Pledges Free 2-Day Shipping on All ItemsMore

More Caffeine Means Less Dementia for WomenFamily

7 Household Hacks That Save You CashAround The House

5 Reasons a Roth IRA Should Be Part of Your Retirement PlanGrow

30 Awesome Things to Do in RetirementCollege

Beware These 10 Retail Sales Tricks That Get You to Spend MoreMore

9 Tips to Ensure You’ll Have Enough to RetireFamily

Rule of thumb: Before you send that dirty text on your company-owned cell phone, imagine that the Supreme Court is going to read it.

If you don’t want your boss to read it, don’t text it on his phone – or one the company provided. That was the message from the Supreme Court today (June 17, 2010).

The Court unanimously upheld a police department’s right to search an officer’s sexy texts on a police department-owned pager, saying the search didn’t violate his constitutional right to privacy.

The case arose when the Ontario, Calif., police department audited the pagers of some of their SWAT team members to see if they were being used too often for personal purposes. One of the cops, Jeff Quon, had sent a lot of personal messages, including some that were apparently exceedingly personal. In one month alone, of 456 messages sent during his shift, 400 were personal.

Quon and three recipients of his messages sued, saying their right to privacy had been violated. The Supreme Court disagreed.

The city of Ontario, like many employers, has a policy that warns employees that employer-owned electronic devices, including computers, phones and pagers, do not include a guarantee of privacy.

According to this AP/CNBC report, Justice Kennedy said that while many companies tolerate the personal use of employer-owned communications equipment, that doesn’t guarantee the privacy of those choosing to do so.

Lesson? Don’t text anything on your company’s equipment that you don’t want read at the Supreme Court.

You can read the case yourself here.

Stacy Johnson

It's not the usual blah, blah, blah

I know... every site you visit wants you to subscribe to their newsletter. But our news and advice is actually worth reading! For 25 years, I've been making people richer without making their eyes glaze over. You'll be glad you did. I guarantee it!


Read Next: 9 Tips to Ensure You’ll Have Enough to Retire

Check Out Our Hottest Deals!

We're always adding new deals and coupons that'll save you big bucks. See the deals to the right and hundreds more in our Deals section.

Click here to explore 1,659 more deals!