Your Rights

Several federal laws work together to protect student privacy. Here’s what you need to know about each one and how they protect you.

Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA)

While CIPA isn’t primarily a privacy law, it affects student privacy in important ways. Under CIPA, schools receiving certain federal funding (E-Rate funding) must:

• Monitor student activity online and filter for adult content

  • According to the FCC, “CIPA does not require the tracking of Internet use by minors or adults”

• Teach digital citizenship

• Include online privacy and safety in their curriculum

If you want to see how much E-Rate funding your school receives, you can check out the E-Rate Funding Database. Scroll down to the filters, click on “Applicant’s Organization Name”, and search for your school or school district.

The Privacy Impact

CIPA’s requirements mean schools must balance:

• Keeping students safe online
• Protecting student privacy
• Maintaining appropriate monitoring levels
• Teaching students to protect their own privacy

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

FERPA is the cornerstone of student privacy protection in the United States. Passed in 1974, it gives you (or your parents, if you’re under 18) specific rights over your educational records.

Your Rights Under FERPA

You have the right to:

• Inspect Your Records: You can review any records the school maintains about you
• Request Corrections: If you find inaccurate or misleading information, you can ask for it to be changed
• Control Information Sharing: The school needs your written consent before sharing your records with others
• File Complaints: If you believe your FERPA rights have been violated, you can complain to the Department of Education

Important FERPA Details

FERPA requires schools to get written consent before sharing your information with others. However, there are some exceptions where schools can share information without consent - but these exceptions must:

• Directly benefit students
• Include specific privacy protections
• Be used only for legitimate educational purposes

To file a complaint relating to either FERPA or the PPRA, or for official information and guidance, see the US Department of Education’s student privacy page.

Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA)

PPRA protects you from being forced to reveal sensitive personal information in school surveys. Under this law:

• Schools must notify parents annually about upcoming surveys

• Parents can review survey materials before they’re given to students

• Depending on who’s funding the survey:

  • Some surveys require parents to explicitly opt in
  • Others allow parents to opt out
  • Schools must clearly communicate which option applies

We belive that what student surveillance systems count as a survey that can be opted out of by parents.

Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)

COPPA regulates how websites and apps can collect information from students under 13. Here’s what it means for you:

• Websites must get parental consent before collecting information

• Schools can provide consent in place of parents, but only if:

  • The information is used solely for educational purposes
  • The website’s privacy practices meet federal standards
  • There are no deceptive practices involved

Even if a school provides consent for you, your parents can still opt you out.

What This Means for You

Understanding these laws helps you protect your rights. Remember:

1. You have legal protections for your privacy
2. Schools must follow specific rules when handling your data
3. You often have the right to know about and control how your information is used
4. There are official channels for complaints if your rights are violated

Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA)

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) protects electronic communications from unauthorized interception. Here’s what it means for student privacy and monitoring:

Key Protections

• Prohibits unauthorized interception of electronic communications (emails, messages, etc.)
• Protects both real-time and stored communications

What Schools Can (and Can’t) Do

Schools may be able to access electronic communications if:

• There is a legitimate educational purpose
• It’s covered by acceptable use policies
• Students and parents have been notified
• Proper procedures are followed

Schools may not be able to:

• Monitor personal devices without consent
• Access private accounts without authorization
• Share collected data inappropriately
• Monitor communications without valid educational reasons

Your Rights Under ECPA

You may have the right to:

• Know about monitoring practices
• Protection from unauthorized surveillance
• Privacy of personal devices and accounts
• Access records of data collected about you

Privacy Torts: Intrusion on seclusion

Intrusion on seclusion is one of the four privacy torts in U.S. common law. For a successful intrusion on seclusion claim, three key elements must be present:

1. The defendant intentionally intruded upon the plaintiff’s seclusion or private concerns
2. The intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person
3. The intrusion caused the plaintiff anguish and suffering

What Counts as Private?

For privacy protection to apply, you must have a “legitimate expectation of privacy” in the place or information being intruded upon. This can include:

• Physical spaces like:

  • Residences
  • Hotel rooms
  • Private areas of public buildings (e.g., restrooms)
  • Phone booths

• Digital information like:

  • Cell phone contents
  • Email contents
  • Location tracking data
  • Personal online activities

Important Details

• The intent must be subjective - the intruder must believe or be substantially certain they lack permission

• You generally cannot claim privacy rights for things put into public spaces

• Schools and employers may have some rights to monitor activity on their devices/networks, but it may be that:

  • The monitoring must be for legitimate purposes
  • You must be notified about monitoring practices
  • The scope must be reasonable
  • Proper procedures must be followed

In Florida v. Jardines, Justice Scalia wrote that “When it comes to the Fourth Amendment, the home is first among equals. At the amendment’s very core stands the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable government intrusion”.

Court Cases

New Jersey v. T.L.O.

This 1985 Supreme Court case set important precedents for student privacy rights and school searches. Here’s what you need to know:

The Case

• A high school student was searched by school administrators who suspected she violated school rules
• The search revealed evidence of drug dealing
• The student argued the search violated her Fourth Amendment rights

The Court’s Decision

• Schools don’t need warrants to search students

• Searches must be:

  1. Justified at the start: There must be reasonable grounds for suspecting the search will find evidence of wrongdoing
  2. Reasonable in scope: The search methods must be reasonably related to the objectives and not excessively intrusive

What This Might Mean Today

• Might apply to digital searches of school-provided devices

• Might mean that school monitoring must be:

  • Based on reasonable suspicion
  • Limited to appropriate scope
  • Related to legitimate school concerns

• Random or excessive surveillance without justification may violate student rights

R.S. v. Minnewaska Area School District

This 2012 case addressed schools’ authority to search students’ social media accounts:

The Case

• A student was punished for Facebook posts made from home
• School officials forced her to provide her Facebook password
• They searched her account in front of school administrators

The Court’s Decision

• Schools cannot compel students to provide social media passwords

• Searching personal social media accounts violates:

  • First Amendment rights (free speech)
  • Fourth Amendment rights (privacy)

• Off-campus speech generally has stronger privacy protections

What This Might Mean Today

• Schools cannot demand passwords to personal accounts
• There’s a clear boundary between school and personal devices
• Schools must respect students’ off-campus privacy rights

G.C. v. Owensboro Public Schools

This 2013 case further defined limits on searching students’ phones:

The Case

• School officials searched a student’s phone after concerning behavior
• The student had a history of mental health issues and drug use
• No specific incident triggered the search

The Court’s Decision

• General concerns about student behavior don’t justify phone searches

• Schools need:

  • Specific reasons to suspect wrongdoing
  • Evidence that a search will reveal policy violations
  • A connection between the search and the suspected violation

What This Might Mean Today

• Schools can’t search devices based on general concerns
• Each search needs specific justification
• Mental health concerns alone don’t justify privacy invasions
• Monitoring must be targeted and well-reasoned

Robbins v. Lower Merion School District

This 2010 case involved a student’s right to privacy in school-issued devices:

The Case

• Students discovered that their school district was secretly activating webcams on school-issued laptops to spy on them at home

• The district took over 66,000 images of students through laptop webcams without consent

• School officials could remotely:

  • Take webcam photos every 15 minutes
  • Capture screenshots
  • Monitor web browsing and chat logs
  • Track laptop locations

• A student was disciplined based on webcam photos taken of him in his bedroom

• The district intentionally hid this capability from students and parents

The Court’s Decision

• The school district settled the lawsuit for $610,000

• The court ordered the district to:

  • Stop all covert webcam monitoring
  • Pay the plaintiffs’ legal fees

• Multiple criminal investigations were launched by:

  • FBI
  • U.S. Attorney’s Office
  • Montgomery County District Attorney

What This Might Mean Today

• Schools cannot secretly monitor students through device cameras
• Students have a right to privacy in their homes
• School surveillance must be transparent and consensual
• Device monitoring requires clear policies and limits