<story><title>Student Suspended for Refusing to Wear a School-Issued RFID Tracker</title><url>http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/11/student-suspension/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Evbn</author><text>Privacy is not a legal right in general, beyond some particilar subclasses like searches and seizures.</text></item><item><author>nhebb</author><text>A judge has granted her a reprieve [1] based on freedom of speech and freedom of religion grounds. The student claimed it violated her religious beliefs. I don&apos;t begrudge anyone the right to practice their religion, but I do wish it had been based on her right to privacy.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/22/christian-student-wins-reprieve-in-forced-tracking-chip-case/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/22/christian-student-wins-rep...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rquantz</author><text>There absolutely is a right to privacy. See the earlier response about Griswold v. Connecticut. I see people frequently saying privacy or things are not rights because they are not enumerated in the Constitution. Please note, however, the Ninth Amendement:&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;In other words, the people have rights other than those in the Bill of Rights. Courts have determined a number of rights that are not in the Constitution, among them the right to privacy, often based on the fact that people have reserved that right and not been denied it in the past. Some people, for instance, believe that, while the individual right to bear arms is not in the Constitution, there is a strong Ninth Amendment case for it[1].&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms#cite_note-Espohl_97-53&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms#cit...&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>Student Suspended for Refusing to Wear a School-Issued RFID Tracker</title><url>http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/11/student-suspension/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Evbn</author><text>Privacy is not a legal right in general, beyond some particilar subclasses like searches and seizures.</text></item><item><author>nhebb</author><text>A judge has granted her a reprieve [1] based on freedom of speech and freedom of religion grounds. The student claimed it violated her religious beliefs. I don&apos;t begrudge anyone the right to practice their religion, but I do wish it had been based on her right to privacy.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/22/christian-student-wins-reprieve-in-forced-tracking-chip-case/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/22/christian-student-wins-rep...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>alayne</author><text>Many people believe that privacy is a fundamental human right. The UN lists it in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.</text></comment>