Andy Haas

Andy Haas

Point of View: Fight to keep right to privacy intact

What does Dobbs v. Jackson mean in terms of our right to privacy?

We all know about the recent Supreme Court decision (Dobbs v. Jackson) that found that the U.S. Constitution does not protect abortion.

But what does that mean in terms of our right to privacy — a right that has been described as “the right to be let alone”?

Whether or not you agree with the right to abortion, you should be concerned with your right to privacy, a right that the Dobbs case repeatedly stated is not contained in the U.S. Constitution.

The right to privacy was first discussed in a 1928 Supreme Court opinion when the Court reviewed wiretapping of phones. If the government did not trespass on your property or read your mail, was it really a search?

That question was more fully answered when subsequent Supreme Courts concluded that the protections found in various amendments all implicitly generated a right to privacy. As a result, in the last 70 years, the constitutional right to privacy has for instance generated protection against searches of your phone calls and text messages, and searches of your medical records and bank information. Privacy also protects against disclosure of personal information; and recognizes an independence in making certain kinds of important decisions.

The protection against disclosure of personal details includes, for instance, a private employee’s medical information that was sought by the government; a private person’s medical and financial information; a minor student’s pregnancy status; and one’s sexual orientation.

The right to make independent decisions about yourself, for instance, includes the right to choose your child’s education by either home-schooling or sending them to a private school. It protects against disclosure of membership in a constitutionally valid organization. The right to refuse compulsory vaccination is based upon this type of privacy right. Also, it is vital to a person’s ability to keep their family together without undue government interference. For example, in 1977, the Supreme Court relied on the right to private family life to rule that a grandmother could move her grandchildren into her home to raise them even though it violated a local zoning ordinance.

You may disagree with the Court’s 1973 Roe decision protecting early stage abortion — a lot of people do. But that decision was based upon a reasoned application of the privacy interest. Likewise, its reversal in Dobbs is based upon another reasoned review of privacy, and that new logic is what should be concerning you. The removal of a right is like playing Jenga: a block is removed, and will the structure collapse? And what about the next block?

The majority opinions in Dobbs repeatedly state that the right to privacy does not exist in the Constitution. Why should that worry you? Because the scope of the privacy right has shrunk in an increasingly digital age when so much of our personal information is voluntarily exposed. In the last 20 years, the courts have struggled with redefining an outdated definition of privacy. Now the writing is on the wall that the right will be sharply diminished rather than redefined, because the right is not explicitly stated in the Constitution and it is just easier to do so.

As a result, everyone with an interest will take further steps to test the protection, ranging from the investigative federal government to private companies tracking and selling your information.

Fortunately, unlike the U.S. Constitution, the Alaska Constitution has an express right to privacy. But that will not stop the federal government or companies such as Facebook from throwing a broad net to capture intimate details or dictating your important decision-making.

If you want your right to remain private — your “right to keep the government and businesses out of your home and bedroom” — you should fear that your right to privacy has just eroded, and you should fight to keep it intact.

Andy Haas is a Homer attorney for 31 years with a background in human rights and constitutional law.

More in Opinion

Gov. Mike Dunleavy speaks in support of an agreement between the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and Goldbelt Inc. to pursue engineering and design services to determine whether it’s feasible to build a new ferry terminal facility in Juneau at Cascade Point. (Clarise Larson / Juneau Empire File)
State, labor and utilities are aligned on modernizing the Railbelt grid

Today, Alaska has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to capture federal infrastructure dollars and… Continue reading

No to 67%

Recently, the Alaska State Officers Compensation Commission voted to raise the pay… Continue reading

This image available under the Creative Commons license shows the outline of the state of Alaska filled with the pattern of the state flag.
Opinion: Old models of development are not sustainable for Alaska

Sustainability means investing in keeping Alaska as healthy as possible.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy unveils proposals to offer public school teachers annual retention bonuses and enact policies restricting discussion of sex and gender in education during a news conference in Anchorage. (Screenshot)
Opinion: As a father and a grandfather, I believe the governor’s proposed laws are anti-family

Now, the discrimination sword is pointing to our gay and transgender friends and families.

Kenai Peninsula Education Association President Nathan Erfurth works in his office on Thursday, Oct. 28, 2021, in Soldotna, Alaska. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
Voices of the Peninsula: Now is the time to invest in Kenai Peninsula students

Parents, educators and community members addressed the potential budget cuts with a clear message.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy holds a press conference at the Capitol on Tuesday, April 9, 2019. (Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: An accurate portrayal of parental rights isn’t controversial

Affirming and defining parental rights is a matter of respect for the relationship between parent and child

Opinion: When the state values bigotry over the lives of queer kids

It has been a long, difficult week for queer and trans Alaskans like me.

Unsplash / Louis Velazquez
Opinion: Fish, family and freedom… from Big Oil

“Ultimate investment in the status quo” is not what I voted for.

Dr. Sarah Spencer. (Photo by Maureen Todd and courtesy of Dr. Sarah Spencer)
Voices of the Peninsula: Let’s bring opioid addiction treatment to the Alaskans who need it most

This incredibly effective and safe medication has the potential to dramatically increase access to treatment

An orphaned moose calf reared by the author is seen in 1970. (Stephen F. Stringham/courtesy photo)
Voices of the Peninsula: Maximizing moose productivity on the Kenai Peninsula

Maximum isn’t necessarily optimum, as cattle ranchers learned long ago.

(Ben Hohenstatt / Juneau Empire File)
Opinion: The time has come to stop Eastman’s willful and wanton damage

God in the Bible makes it clear that we are to care for the vulnerable among us.

Caribou graze on the greening tundra of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in northeast Alaska in June, 2001. (Michael Penn / Juneau Empire File)
Opinion: AIDEA’s $20 million-and-growing investment looks like a bad bet

Not producing in ANWR could probably generate a lot of money for Alaska.