| 中文摘要 |
"法院在判定任何政府搜索行為的「合理性」時，必須考量被搜索者之「合理期待的隱私保護」。譬如，本院在衡量對學生運動員進行尿液檢測之侵擾程度的案件中曾表示，學生運動員合理期待的隱私保護甚至更少。公立學校的更衣間是學生運動員的一般活動場所，通常不提供相當程度的隱私保護。同樣，本院曾裁定，當員工期待的隱私保護減少是因為他們工作的產業是普遍受到管制，或者當工作場所的實際運作情況導致主管和同事所為與工作有關的某些侵擾在其他情況下可能被視作不合理但在此卻是完全合理時，本院採用不適用於廣大公眾的「特定場合標準」。The reasonableness of any search must be considered in the context of the person’s legitimate expectations of privacy. For example, when weighing the invasiveness of urinalysis of high school athletes, the Court noted that legitimate privacy expectations are even less with regard to student athletes. Public school locker rooms, the usual sites for these activities, are not notable for the privacy they afford. Likewise, the Court has used a context-specific benchmark inapplicable to the public at large when the expectations of privacy of covered employees are diminished by reason of their participation in an industry that is regulated pervasively, or when the operational realities of the workplace may render entirely reasonable certain work-related intrusions by supervisors and co-workers that might be viewed as unreasonable in other contexts." |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
