Popular Government

From the article:

Privacy . . . the right to be free from governmental interference . . . a law enforcement officer’s authority to investigate crimes . . . the government’s interest in investigating conduct that is not necessarily criminal—the Fourth Amendment affects all these issues . . . One U.S. Supreme Court case, Katz v. United States, has had a particularly important impact on the relationship between privacy and government authority under the Fourth Amendment, establishing the basic test for determining whether a person’s interest in privacy is sufficient to warrant Fourth Amendment protection. This and later cases decided by the Court—as well as federal and state legislation that expands on the basic protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment—are the focus of this article.

From the article:

The specifics of the issues that state courts face are different from those faced by the federal government in setting up military courts, but the fundamental tension between closing courts to protect a specific party’s interest and opening them to serve the public’s interest is similar. This article describes the ways in which North Carolina resolves those tensions in its courts.

From the article:

Since September 11, 2001, many public institutions have been trying to strike the proper balance between security and privacy...Public school students, and adults, have the same concerns about privacy. They want control over who searches their possessions and their bodies and who has access to information about them.

Students and their parents who think school officials have acted in a way that does not properly respect students’ privacy may challenge the action. Occasionally the challenge results in litigation. The U.S. Supreme Court hears only a small fraction of the cases it is asked to review, so its decision to hear three cases involving student privacy in its 2001–2 term is noteworthy. This article provides a brief overview of the two issues before the Court: searches of students and student records.

From the article:

For many years, federal, state, and local lawmakers have struggled to find the appropriate balance between protecting the privacy of health information and ensuring that health information is available when necessary for other important purposes. A patchwork of federal and state laws, rules, common law, and professional ethical obligations and guidelines has resulted, providing a hazy outline at best for when providers and insurers may share health information with other entities.

This past year, however, the first and only comprehensive federal rule on health privacy went into effect. This article provides a brief history of the new rule, summarizes many of the rule’s complex requirements, and offers a few suggestions for entities and local governments, particularly counties, to consider as they begin to comply.

Local governments, large and small, support a vast array of computer hardware and software systems. They exchange public and private information via the Internet and a variety of “secure” networks among fellow employees, citizens, clients, and other governments. All expect information systems to do the work they were designed to do, be available when they are needed, and maintain the reliability and the integrity of the information that is contained within them. The importance of security is heightened, and security is made more difficult, as an increasing number of people connect to public information systems.

This issue of N.C. Journal has five articles:

• New Environmental Finance Center Focuses on Real-World Issues
• Consortium Builds Bridges Between Government and Youth
• Teleconference Provides Timely, Economical Look at Changes in Law
• MPA Students Present Results of Practical Research
• Listservs Connect Local Governments

This issue of At the Institute has three articles:

• Law Firm Makes Lead Gift to Judicial Endowment Fund
• Brown-Graham Joins Z. Smith Reynolds Board
• Brown Joins Faculty