FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3122261103> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3122261103 startingPage "953" @default.
• W3122261103 abstract "For more than three decades, the hypothetical constitutional right of information privacy has governed by assumption in the lower courts. The Supreme Court assumed the right into being in two cases decided in 1977, Whalen v. Roe and Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, and persisted in assuming the right exists without deciding recently in NASA v. Nelson. In the fertile murk of indecision, a hodgepodge of standards from interest balancing all the way up to strict scrutiny and a quasi-constitutional law of intuitions have arisen in the lower courts. What constitutes a violation of this assumed right? The law struggles for a standard to define a violation, but we know it when we feel it. The article contends that the very fuzziness of the hypothetical right comes from its nature as an affectively saturated moral intuition regarding the proper balance of state and citizen power and unease over incursions in times of social change. The article is also about how to translate the powerful moral intuition that the Constitution should have something to say (even if its text does not quite say it) when the government does something creepy or outrageous with our intimate information into respectable law that helps sort out the manifold meritless claims predicated on privacy as knee-jerk reaction rather than right and allows policy innovation in the laboratories of states and political branches. The article argues that privacy is a transitional lens that opens up our vision of the liberty and freedoms safeguarded in the Constitution. We need not invent or recognize a new atextual right of information privacy. Rather the concept of information privacy is a lens that brings into focus a richer vision of the meanings of textually inscribed constitutional freedoms and what it means to vindicate them.  Assistant Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law. Many thanks to Anita AllenCastellitto, Jason Schultz and Kathryn Watts for insights that helped me develop the ideas in this article, to Ryan Crosner, Emily Stopa, Vivian Lee and the Board and members of the University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law for a rich and fascinating conference, and to audience participants at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law for their very helpful comments and ideas. Student participants offered wonderful ideas, and I want to particularly thank University of Pennsylvania student Julie Cohen for her insights. I am also very grateful to my excellent research assistant Ali Gaffney, University of Washington Class of 2012." @default.
• W3122261103 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3122261103 creator A5023002839 @default.
• W3122261103 date "2012-01-01" @default.
• W3122261103 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W3122261103 title "Constitutionalizing Informational Privacy by Assumption" @default.
• W3122261103 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W3122261103 type Work @default.
• W3122261103 sameAs 3122261103 @default.
• W3122261103 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3122261103 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3122261103 hasAuthorship W3122261103A5023002839 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C14587133 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C169437150 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C18650270 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C2776050585 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C2776154427 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C144024400 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C14587133 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C169437150 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C17744445 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C18650270 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C190253527 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C199539241 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C2776050585 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C2776154427 @default.
• W3122261103 hasConceptScore W3122261103C2778272461 @default.
• W3122261103 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W3122261103 hasLocation W31222611031 @default.
• W3122261103 hasOpenAccess W3122261103 @default.
• W3122261103 hasPrimaryLocation W31222611031 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W113709173 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W1491500230 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W1553654639 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W1576967185 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W186415898 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W196436366 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W2192595556 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W2315153582 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W232968619 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W272379245 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W2992251944 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W2998011070 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W2999798876 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W3007999426 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W3121551700 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W3122910710 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W3123470523 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W3124564138 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W831281140 @default.
• W3122261103 hasRelatedWork W2563430357 @default.
• W3122261103 hasVolume "14" @default.
• W3122261103 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3122261103 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3122261103 magId "3122261103" @default.
• W3122261103 workType "article" @default.