The document discusses reasonable expectations of privacy regarding government-issued equipment. It argues that the government has the right to search equipment it owns that is issued to employees. While the 4th Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches, government employees should be held to government standards. When sensitive information is accessible, the government needs to ensure it is not leaked. The Supreme Court is still evaluating digital privacy under the 4th Amendment.

1. Paper #1
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
In this discussion, we are asked about the reasonable
expectation of privacy on government-owned equipment that has
been issued to us. In my opinion, the government is actually in
the right to search without a warrant the computer records and
history of government employees. The Fourth Amendment
prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures from both civil
and criminal authorities (Lynch, 2006). I would argue that since
the government owns the issued equipment then the government
has every right to search that equipment. The Fourth
Amendment protects an American citizen’s property from
seizure and the privacy of that American citizen, but this
equipment is not privately owned. Also, when an American
citizen becomes a federal employee then the citizen should be
held to the standards of the government. The government
employee could also have access to sensitive material, in which
that material if leaked, could cause serious and detrimental
harm to the interests of the United States. In cases that involve
an employee having access to sensitive material, then the
federal government has every right to access the computer
records of this person. Also, a phone issued out by the federal
government should only be used for the government, and not for
private use. I have a government computer issued to me. That
computer is used for government business and was paid for by
the government. In my opinion, the federal employee should not
have a reasonable expectation of privacy on equipment that is
issued by the federal government. The United States Supreme
Court is still in the process of evaluating how the protections
garnered from the Fourth Amendment fits into this digital age
(Ferguson, 2020). In saying this, future court cases that take
place in the digital age can eventually change the Supreme
Court’s stance on privacy protections.

2. References
Ferguson, A. G. (2020). Structural Sensor Surveillance.
Iowa Law Review
,
106
(1), 47+.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A648382109/AONE?u=tel_a_bet
helc&sid=AONE&xid=084bdf7f
Lynch, M. (2006). Mere platitudes: the "Domino Effect" of
school-search cases on the Fourth Amendment rights of every
American.
Iowa Law Review
,
91
(2), 781+.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A145338747/AONE?u=tel_a_bet
helc&sid=AONE&xid=4dcacfe1
Paper #2
Rights of Employers to Monitor Employee Devices
Morrison and Bailey (2011) state that smartphones can now
perform tasks formerly reserved for computers. These phones
have tremendous processing hardware and significant memory
capacity to run both productivity-enhancing and productivity-
impeding software. These phones can take pictures, record
videos, and support video conferencing. In short, these modern
smartphones are capable of delivering and receiving vast
amounts of information.

3. Given these phones' abilities, employers have a concern about
the use of these phones in the workplace. Weisberg (2019) says
that after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the
government and many employers re-evaluated their privacy
policies and expanded the government's and employer's right to
monitor Internet usage and other electronic communication. No
search warrant is required. A study by the GAO of 14 private
companies reported they monitor their employee's electronic
communication and computer file activities. Each company
maintained that they did this to create back-up files and hold
employees accountable for following company policies. There
are some restrictions placed on monitoring employee-owned
phones but it is legal for the government to monitor government
owned phones while the employee is at home or away from the
office.
Weisberg (2019) says that both government and non-government
employers have the right to monitor their property, including
almost anything you can do on these devices. This monitoring
includes identifying the type of software downloaded, Internet
usage, and what type of files and documents are stored on the
computer. The employer can even place a keystroke logger on
the computer to track how much you use the computer and
exactly what you are entering into the computer. Weisberg
(2019) cites a 2007 survey that found 66% of employers monitor
all web browsing, and 30% of employers say they have fired an
employee for inappropriate browsing. The one thing employers
cannot monitor is union-related business.
For purposes of quality control, employers can monitor
company work phones. Weisberg (2019) says that if there is no
policy banning personal calls during work time, the employer is
supposed to stop once it is clear that the call's purpose is
personal. If there is a policy banning personal calls, the
employer can continue to listen to be sure the call is private and
then take disciplinary action against the employee.

4. Whittaker (2013) states that, for security reasons, governments
may ban the use of thumb drives and similar devices on
government computers. Whitaker cites the case of Edward
Snowden and Bradley Manning, who used thumb drives to
download classified documents and share them with others.
Such a ban is useful not just to keep secrets in but to keep
malware out. Whittaker states that for those who are allowed to
use such external storage devices, the government can monitor
them, even if the storage device belongs to the employee.
References
Hall, D. (2015).
Criminal law and procedure
(7th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Morrison, C. D., & Bailey, R. L. (2011). Employee Privacy
Rights: Employer Monitoring and Investigating Employees’
Electronic Activities and Communications. Energy & Mineral
Law Institute, 32, 166–173.
https://search-ebscohost-
com.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ofs&AN=
74094689&site=ehost-live
O’Brien, C. N. (2002). The Impact of Employer E-Mail Policies
on Employee Rights to Engage in Concerted Activities
Protected by the National Labor Relations Act.
Labor Law Journal, 53
(2), 69–77.
https://search-ebscohost-
com.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=
7305366&site=ehost-live
Weisberg, L. (2019, May 3). What can an employer track?
Weisberg Cummings, P.C.

5. https://www.weisbergcummings.com/employee-tracking-and-
recording/#:~:text=Employers%20need%20your%20permission
%20before,protection%20to%20public%20sector%20employees
.
Whittaker, Z. (2013, Jun. 24). Pentagon’s failed flash drive ban
policy: A lesson for every CIO.
ZD Net
,
https://www.zdnet.com/article/pentagons-failed-flash-drive-ban-
policy-a-lesson-for-every-cio/
Paper #3
Upon reading through the text there are two juvenile
adjudications that stand out to me. I think that the following
two adjudications that are most important to prosecutors are: 1)
"fewer legal maneuvers are available to defense attorneys and 2)
the reality that few appeals are filed by defense
attorneys" (Elrod, 2014). "Judges are the axles on the wheels of
the justice turn" (Rachlinski, 2017). To me this means that
judges have a lot of discretion as to rather they choose to
review, let alone approve or deny a juvenile's appeal. If juvenile
defenders have high caseloads, they may not even bother and/or
be motivated to pursue the appeals process for clients due to
this reason. Due to their being fewer legal maneuvers available,
this would juveniles are more vulnerable to feel the wrath of the
system. "Most attorneys have high case loads and lack in
training in the specific area of juveniles justice which may
affect the overall outcome of a juvenile's case"(Elrod, 2014).
"Juvenile defenders are a critical buffer against injustice and
are a the heart of ensuring that the delinquency system operates
fairly, accurately and humanely" (NJDC. 2015) . In my opinion,
another major factor as to why juveniles are unable to receive
adequate representation is probably for the same reasons as to

6. why they are engaging in delinquent behavior is due to poverty.
If a juveniles is impoverished most likely his/her family cannot
afford adequate legal representation.
References:
Elrod, P., & Ryder, R.S. (2014). Juvenile Justice: A social,
historical, and legal perspective (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett
Learning.
NJDC. (2015). Juvenile Defense Policy and Practice Career
Resource Guide. Retrieved February 24, 2021, from
https://hls.harvard.edu/content/uploads/2015/10/Juvenile-
Defense-Career-Resource-Guide.pdf
Rachlinski, J. J. (2017). Judging the Judiciary by the Numbers:
Empirical Research on Judges. Retrieved February 24, 2021,
from
https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=
2668&context=facpub
Paper#4
The juvenile offenders of the court system are handled very
much differently from adult offenders. There are a certain set of
rules for juvenile offenders when they are summoned into court.
Some people seem to think that juveniles are denied basic
protections and also that the court’s informal procedures with
juveniles are failing to serve both the juveniles, themselves, and
the community. I believe that one of the reasons juveniles are
treated differently is because of their age. Juveniles are not
allowed to buy firearms or drink alcohol because they are not
mature enough to have those responsibilities. Since juveniles
are not mature yet, their criminal actions are seen as reversible

7. and the courts think that they are at a better level to be
rehabilitated before they grow to adulthood. “The rational part
of a teen’s brain isn’t fully developed and won’t be until age 25
or so” (Campellone & Turley. ND). Two of the features that
stand out are fewer legal maneuvers available to defense
attorneys, and the ability of judges to revise adverse verdicts
reached by other hearing officers (Elrod. 2014). The state makes
the decisions on whether or not to send a juvenile to juvenile
court or to criminal court, so in turn, the prosecutors have a
much larger advantage over defense attorneys. And lastly, the
judges are not limited to act solely on current case law or the
prior verdicts which means the defense attorney does not know
the fate of the case regardless of what happened in the past. In
the end the defense attorney cannot give the right predictions or
plan for a strategy to fight any changes.
Campellone, J. & Turley, R. (ND) Understanding the Teen
Brain. Health Encyclopedia. Rochester Medical Center.
Retrieved from:
https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?Con
tentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051
Elrod, P., & Ryder, R. S. (2014). Juvenile Justice: A Social,
Historical, and Legal Perspective (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett
Learning.
Paper #5
The Environmental Protection Agency has a Safer Product
Labeling Program entitled "Design for the Environment" that is
responsible for determining how to effectively highlight safer
products for consumer use. These products can include all-
purpose cleaners, dishwasher detergents, car care products,
carpet cleaners, dish and hand soaps, floor care products,

8. laundry detergents and softeners, leather cleaners, toilet bowl
and tub/tile cleaners, window/glass cleaners, and wood cleaners
(Adams, Carroll, Dorsey, Fekete, & Harris, 2014). I have at
least one of every aforementioned product in my house
currently. Aside from cleaning products alone, there are other
countless products found in my home containing chemicals and
toxins. These include fingernail polish, fingernail polish
remover, perfumes, shampoo and conditioners, bodywash,
facewash, beard oils, makeup, medicines, and pharmaceuticals.
Additionally, many different chemicals and toxins can be found
throughout the foods and beverages stored in the refrigerator
and pantry.
I originally thought of only cleaning products when considering
what household items contained chemicals and toxins, so it was
a little surprising when I considered all of the other products in
my house that contain these things. However, I frequently use
every product that I purchase with the exception of maybe one,
so I do not dispose of chemicals until they have been
completely used. The one I do not use often I could definitely
dispose of without missing it. If I feel the need to dispose of
any of these products before they have completely run out, there
are different suggested ways to do so carefully. First, it is
recommended to never dispose of hazardous wastes directly
down the sink drain or toilet, as it could pollute drinking water
(Wright, 2019). Acids and bases and pesticides should be used
entirely before their disposal. Solvents should be recycled.
Lastly, bleaches, cleaners, and polishes should be poured down
the drain slowly with running water (Wright, 2019).
References
EPA can help consumers identify household and other products
with safer chemicals by strengthening its “Design for the
Environment” Program. (2014).

9. Wright, S. E. (Susan E., Koukel, S., Griffiths, R., NMSU
College of Agricultural, & Consumer. (2019). Safe use and
disposal of household chemicals, 2019. NMSU College of
Agricultural, Consumer, and Environmental Sciences (ACES.
Paper #6
(Jones, M. M., & Benrubi, I. D. 2013) Said, “As household
chemicals proliferated in the early 20th century, physicians
concerned with childhood poisonings pressured the federal
government to enact legislation mandating warning labels on
packaging for these substances. Manufacturers of household
chemicals agreed to labeling requirements for caustic poisons
but resisted broader regulation.” There are many household
chemicals that a lot of people use every day. Many of these
chemicals are harmful or sometimes fatal if they are ingested, of
if they were to make contact with the skin or eyes. Plant
fertilizer can burn the skin, so can bleach, and some detergents
can even cause blindness if introduced to the eyes. The EPA, in
this regard are useful in regulating household cleaners, and
requiring warning labels.
(Withgott J. H., & Laposata M. 2018). Said, “The Toxic
Substances Control Act directs the EPA to monitor thousands of
industrial chemicals manufactured in or imported into the
United States, ranging from PCBs to lead to bisphenol A.”After
conducting a search of kitchen and bathroom cabinets, I was
surprised that I did not have more cleaning chemical than I did.
The bathroom only contained toilet bowl cleaner, which
contains bleach. The kitchen cabinets contained lemon scented
ammonia, which is obviously a much stronger chemical. I also
realized that I really do not have any extra chemical lying
around due to lack of use. The labels on both of these bottles
stated that proper disposal should consist of simply turning in

10. the empty containers to a recycling center. However, neither
labels stated how to properly dispose of the chemical itself.
Jones, M. M., & Benrubi, I. D. (2013). POISON POLITICS: A
Contentious History of Consumer Protection Against Dangerous
Household Chemicals in the United States. American Journal of
Public Health, 103(5), 801–812.
https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301066
Withgott J. H., & Laposata M. (2018). Essential Environment.
[Savant Learning Systems]. Retrieved
from https://savantlearningsystems.vitalsource.com/#/books/978
0134818689/