Judge Orders Protestor to Hand Over Tweets

By Julie Griffin July 03, 2012

Who would have thought that an Occupy protest on the Brooklyn Bridge would turn into yet another heated debate over rights to privacy in the context of social media? On October 1, Malcolm Harris was among 700 protestors who were arrested and are facing charges for disregarding law enforcements’ orders to stay on the pedestrian walkway. However, the seemingly trivial charges have been overshadowed by a judges’ ruling that Harris must turn over his tweets to the DA’s office, a ruling that is loudly protested by Harris’ attorney, the ACLU and even Twitter.

Chief Assistant DA, Daniel Alonso tells the press, “We look forward to Twitter’s complying and to moving forward with the trial.” Twitter, which went to court on behalf of Harris, has made statements indicating that they do not share the DA’s enthusiasm over this coerced participation.

The Manhattan judge who ruled that Harris must turn over his tweets to prosecutors, Judge Matthew Sciarrino wrote, “If you post a tweet, just like if you scream it out the window, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy," accentuating his statement with hashtags.

Twitter’s legal team argued, however, that federal law requires more than just the subpoena prosecutors served Harris for obtaining tweets that are over 180 days old – they would need a search warrant as well. But Judge Sciarrino countered this by arguing that the tweets the prosecution wants are less than 180 days old.

Apparently, the prosecution believes that Harris’ tweets will provide evidence that Harris was fully aware of law enforcement’s instructions to stay on the pedestrian walkway and did not permit demonstrators to spread out onto the roadway, as some are claiming. The prosecution believes they will find evidence in Harris’ tweets that the magazine editor blatantly disregarded law enforcements’ instructions.

Debates over privacy rights and social media that end up in the courtroom, typically involve Facebook. The Social Networking Online Privacy Act (SNOPA) has protected employees and students who have voluntarily published information on Facebook from having that information used against them in the workforce or in an academic institution. SNOPA also prohibits employers or educators from snooping or coercing prospective employees or student athletes into opening their accounts for scrutiny.

Judge Sciarrino might have a point about the publicity inherent in Twitter. Similarly, other judges have ruled that “liking” something on Facebook is not protected by the First Amendment.




Edited by Brooke Neuman

Contributing Writer

SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Related Articles

4 Biohacking Facts You Should Know About in 2017

By: Special Guest    8/18/2017

When it comes to biohacking, a more recent development in science, it involves combining the idea of hacking with biology. In today's world, biohackin…

Read More

Rest Your Weary Fingers: Voice Activation is Coming to a CRM Near You

By: Special Guest    8/9/2017

We spend a lot of time talking to our gadgets these days. Whether we're seeking directions from Siri or weather updates from Alexa, speech is quickly …

Read More

Kevin Kennedy Stepping Down, Will New Leadership Help Guide Avaya Back into Prominence?

By: Erik Linask    8/7/2017

After more than eight years as Avaya's chief executive, Kevin Kennedy will be stepping down from that role as of October 1, 2017. He'll be replaced by…

Read More

Micro-CT Scans Allow Researchers to Study Live Insects in 3D

By: Kayla Matthews    8/7/2017

The things we don't know about the natural world could fill textbooks. That's why excitement is the most appropriate response when we discover new way…

Read More

Gogo Making Air Travel More Productive

By: Erik Linask    8/4/2017

Gogo created tremendous hype when it first enabled in-flight connectivity on American Airlines, back in 2008. But, anyone who has used in-flight Wi-Fi…

Read More