There was an interesting exchange a few days ago during a case that the Supreme Court was hearing about an employee's right to privacy while texting.

Kashmir Hill

Today, the Supreme Court heard the case of the California SWAT officer who sued the city of Ontario for violation of his privacy after his employer reviewed the messages he sent on his work-issued pager. He had been using the pager for personal text messages — notably for steamy SMSes to his estranged wife and to his girlfriend with whom he worked. (More background here.)

At first glance, the case might seem like an easy one. Of course the police department has the right to look at messages sent on an officer’s work pager, right?

But then think about it in your own context. Do you assume that your employer is reviewing every text you send from your work phone? Is it fair for your employer to look at every email that goes out from your work computer? Does it matter whether it’s going from your work account or your personal gmail account?

I know some of the quirks that our Supreme Court justices have are great fun for reading and conversations like this one via Jeff Toobin:

JEFFREY TOOBIN: He’s gone now, but probably Souter. He was so odd. No cell phone, no computer, didn’t like electric light, ate an apple (including core) and yogurt for lunch every day. And a brilliant guy. What’s not to like?

However, these idiosyncrasies aren't so cute when it comes to the law.

If our Supreme Court justices don't know the difference between a pager and an email--how can they render important decisions in today's tech savvy world?

According to this post, at DC Dicta, the Court asked some questions of the lawyers which, well, the justices’ kids and grandkids could have answered while sleepwalking.

According to the story, the first sign of trouble came was about midway through the argument, when Chief Justice John Roberts asked what the difference was “between email and a pager?” (Cue sound of hard slap against forehead.)

At another point, Justice Anthony Kennedy asked what would happen if a text message was sent to an officer at the same time he was sending one to someone else.

“Does it say: ‘Your call is important to us, and we will get back to you?’” Kennedy asked. (Cue sound of louder slap against forehead.)

Justice Antonin Scalia stumbled getting his arms around with the idea of a service provider.

“You mean (the text) doesn’t go right to me?” he asked.

Then he asked whether they can be printed out in hard copy.

“Could Quon print these spicy little conversations and send them to his buddies?” Scalia asked.

This is just horrifying.

Curiouser and curiouser:

The whereabouts of Gov. Mark Sanford was unknown for nearly four days, and some state leaders question who was in charge of the executive office.[..]

Neither the governor’s office nor the State Law Enforcement Division, which provides security for governors, had been able to reach Sanford after he left the mansion Thursday in a black SLED Suburban SUV, said Sen. Jake Knotts and three others familiar with the situation but declined to be identified.

Sanford’s last known whereabouts had been near Atlanta because a mobile telephone tower picked up a signal from his phone, authorities said. His office now knows where he is, Adams said.

First lady Jenny Sanford told The Associated Press earlier Monday her husband has been gone for several days and she did not know where.

She said she was not concerned.

The governor’s state and personal phones had been turned off and he had not responded to phone or text messages since at least the weekend, a source familiar with the situation said.

Most mobile phones cannot be tracked if they are turned off.

Jenny Sanford said the governor said he needed time away from their children to write something.

The governor’s office issued a statement Monday afternoon: "Gov. Sanford is taking some time away from the office this week to recharge after the stimulus battle and the legislative session, and to work on a couple of projects that have fallen by the wayside. We are not going to discuss the specifics of his travel arrangements or his security arrangements."

One official familiar with the situation said there was no indication that foul play might have been involved because Sanford occasionally makes trips without his security detail.

Knotts, a longtime Sanford critic, said he contacted SLED Chief Reggie Lloyd Saturday after he heard reports the governor could not be reached.

"Chief Lloyd confirmed that my information is legitimate," Knotts said. "He shared my concerns" about succession of power in Sanford’s absence, the Lexington Republican said. Lloyd could not be reached immediately on Monday.

"I was recently made aware that Governor Sanford has frequently been eluding SLED agents and disappearing at odd times," Knotts said. Previously, Sanford has not been out of all contact - including with his own office - for this long before, a source, who insisted on anonymity, said.

Allegedly, Sanford has been located, or at least his whereabouts are known, but the story generally leaves more questions than answers.

(P)ulling a disappearing act like this -- whatever the reason -- is a decidedly odd move for someone who is seen as a likely presidential candidate in 2012.

Sanford prides himself on his willingness to do things differently in politics -- he spent the last seven years clashing with a Republican-led legislature -- and his iconoclast image is part of his appeal to voters.

But, disappearing for days on end is odd behavior even for Sanford.

Rachel Maddow from last week, in a clip that explains exactly why I don't get the whole sex/texting trend among the young people today.

On a related topic, The Village Voice has a lovely collection of MP3's of Bill O'Reilly reading icky sex passages from his 1989 crime novel. As the former mayor of Detroit would "say," LOL!

Open thread below....

Guest hosted by Blue Gal (I'll be here all week, send me tips, but don't try the veal.)

Susie Bright (nsfw): The most expensive birth control in the world, and why is it so cheap in Houston?

The Aristocrats: Signs you have too many houses.

CJSD: First Veep Possibility to answer the phone at 3am wins!

Eh? The Canadians are making fun of our turning small Iowa towns into open air prisons. (h/t Existentialist
Cowboy)

There is a conference this weekend in New Orleans on The Future of New Orleans including a blogger meet up tonight. No word on whether you'll be able to receive text messages at the conference. (On the Obama text msg. topic, Sef leaves the best. comment. ever.)

Here we go again with the missing emails. Just this Tuesday a judge ordered the White House to come clean on its never-ending scandal over something like 10 million missing emails - including 4 years worth deleted by Karl Rove - and now we've got Missouri Governor Matt Blunt being accused of more of the same:

KC Prime Buzz: The former deputy legal counsel to Gov. Matt Blunt sued the governor and four of his top aides Wednesday, alleging a wide-ranging conspiracy to cover up the administration’s activities.

The suit, filed in Jackson County Circuit Court, describes schemes within the governor’s office to destroy public documents, to evade the state Sunshine law by sending text messages on personal Blackberrys and to fire a long-time state employee for political reasons. ...

h/t to Jamie who adds: "Can we label the entire Republican Party as organized crime yet?"

Net neutrality, anyone? What an incredibly slippery slope we're now hurtling down...

Scholars&Rogues:

Slashdot broke the news on Saturday that AT&T's updated terms of service for its high-speed Internet packages essentially forbid you from criticizing the company on pain of cancellation. The full terms of service are here, and here's the offending passage highlighted, courtesy of Ars Technica:

AT&T may immediately terminate or suspend all or a portion of your Service, any Member ID, electronic mail address, IP address, Universal Resource Locator or domain name used by you, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes (a) violates the Acceptable Use Policy; (b) constitutes a violation of any law, regulation or tariff (including, without limitation, copyright and intellectual property laws) or a violation of these TOS, or any applicable policies or guidelines, or (c) tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries.

This is the exact kind of overbroad legalese that gets companies in trouble in ways they probably never thought of. If I am an AT&T subscriber, for example, and I post derogatory comments about AT&T on a site they own, does this give them leave to terminate my service? What if I post or send a complaint about AT&T to a complaint site or consumer news site, like ConsumerAffairs.Com (whom I write for), and they publish said complaint? Am I liable if I was using my AT&T ISP while writing said complaint? What if I did so while using my laptop at a Wi-Fi hotspot? The mind boggles.

Martin at S&R continues on with other egregious acts that AT&T has committed in the last few years, from cooperating with the Bush Administration on domestic wiretapping to blocking NARAL's text messages. And while Verizon's Terms of Service are no better, this kind of corporate fascism is truly disturbing. Tim Karr has more.  Thankfully, I don't use AT&T or Verizon for my service, so I feel comfortable quoting William O. Douglas to them:

Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.

Remember that.

GuardianUK: (h/t Gregory)

Tension between British and American commanders in southern Afghanistan erupted into the open yesterday as a senior UK military officer said he had asked the US to withdraw its special forces from a volatile area that was crucial in the battle against the Taliban.

British and Nato defence officials have consistently expressed concern about US tactics, notably air strikes, which kill civilians, sabotaging the battle for "hearts and minds" and infuriating Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president.

The coalition of the "We're willing, but not with you here"? Why does there seem to be so much more common sense and thoughtfulness on the part of British military tactics? I'd like to see our brass adopt some of the British forces' techniques. Sadly, this is likely the only guideline they will likely imitate:

Sweeping new guidelines barring military personnel from speaking about their service publicly have been quietly introduced by the Ministry of Defence, the Guardian has learned.

Soldiers, sailors and airforce personnel will not be able to blog, take part in surveys, speak in public, post on bulletin boards, play in multi-player computer games or send text messages or photographs without the permission of a superior if the information they use concerns matters of defence.

CNN via RawStory:

CARY, Illinois (AP) -- A high school senior was arrested after writing that "it would be funny" to dream about opening fire in a building and having sex with the dead victims, authorities said. Another passage in the essay advised his teacher at Cary-Grove High School: "don't be surprised on inspiring the first CG shooting," according to a criminal complaint filed this week.

Allen Lee, 18, faces two disorderly conduct charges over the creative-writing assignment, which he was given on Monday in English class at the northern Illinois school...read on

I have a feeling there will be a lot of text messages being sent in HS and students will be writing more of this now...Just a hunch...

Video

Zogby Cell phone poll results for likely voter's under 30.

Kerry 55

Bush 40

with only a 1.2% margin of error

over 6,000 text messages were received so the margin of error is lower than normal.

If these people vote, Bush doesn't have a chance.