The Supreme Court appears likely to rule against public employees who claimed a local government violated their privacy by reading racy text messages they sent on their employers’ account.Even though officers were told informally that "no one would look further if officers personally paid for charges above a monthly allowance," written policy stated the opposite. "The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the informal policy was enough to give the officers a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in their text messages and establish that their constitutional rights had been violated."
The Obama Administration sides with the Ontario, CA police department, and it appears as though the Supreme Court will concur. I'm wondering how screwed those officers are that sent the questionable messages.
Read the whole thing on PoliceLink.