Skip to content

Menu

Jackson Lewis P.C.  logo
HomeAboutServicesContactSubscribe
Search
Close

Workplace Privacy, Data Management & Security Report

Supreme Court Weighs in on School Regulation of Students’ Social Media Speech

By Joseph J. Lazzarotti, Jason C. Gavejian & Maya Atrakchi on July 5, 2021
Posted in Online Privacy, Social Networking, Workplace Privacy

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a Pennsylvania school district went too far when it suspended a student from participation in the school’s cheerleading squad based on “vulgar” comments made about the coach on the student’s personal social media account. In an 8-1 decision, the high court emphasized that while schools have some latitude under the First Amendment to regulate student speech outside of school, in this specific circumstance their authority to do so was “diminished”.

Although the Court reached the same ultimate result as the Third Circuit, it rejected the Third Circuit’s conclusion that the school lacked the authority to regulate student speech off campus  in any circumstance. “Unlike the Third Circuit, we do not believe the special characteristics that give schools additional license to regulate student speech always disappear when a school regulates speech that takes place off campus,” Justice Stephen Breyer noted in the majority opinion. “The school’s regulatory interests remain significant in some off-campus circumstances.”

In reaching its conclusion, the Court primarily addressed its ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District from 1969, in which the Court ruled in a landmark decision that a school can only interfere with student speech if it “substantially disrupts” school operations. However, the Court did not delve into where to draw the line on what type of speech qualifies as such that can be considered “substantially disruptive” off campus. Instead, the Court highlighted three features of off campus speech that often, “even if not always”, diminish a school’s latitude to regulate such speech: 1) “Geographically speaking” off campus speech generally is considered parental responsibility, rather than  a school’s responsibility, 2) a school’s inability to regulate a student’s speech 24/7, particularly regarding speech relating to politics and religions, and 3) a school’s interest in protecting “unpopular speech” particularly when it takes place off campus, to protect the “marketplace of ideas”.

In the specific circumstances of the case, the Court emphasized that the school failed to prove that the student’s off campus speech at issue caused a “significant disruption” of classes or extracurricular activities.  The “vulgar” messages were sent on a social media platform that only preserves communications for 24 hours, sent to a “select group of “friends””, and only spread through rumors by other students.  The disruption/lack of morale such messages may have caused to the student’s fellow classmates and teammates could have more effectively been mitigated by the school administration “quelling” the discussion and promoting positive speech, rather than suspending the student from extracurricular activities. “If today’s decision teaches any lesson, it must be that the regulation of many types of off-premises student speech raises serious First Amendment concerns, and school officials should proceed cautiously before venturing into this territory”, Justice Breyer concluded.

Though the case before the Supreme Court addresses the First Amendment and regulation of speech in the school context, it is easy to draw parallels between student speech off campus, and an employee’s speech outside the workplace.  Over the past few years, states around the country have enacted laws limiting an employer’s ability to access the personal social media accounts of job applicants and employees. However, these laws generally do not prohibit employers from conducting certain investigations, such as to ensure compliance with state or federal laws, regulatory requirements or prohibitions against work-related employee misconduct based on the receipt of specific information about activity on an employee or applicant’s personal online account. Employers also may monitor, review, access or block electronic data stored on an electronic communications device paid for, in whole or in part, by the employer, or traveling through or stored on the employer’s network.

When companies are faced with adverse social media activity or campaigns, whether it be by employees, customers, bloggers, etc., they frequently are unprepared to take the appropriate steps to investigate, or to weigh the legal, business, reputational, and related risks in deciding what actions, if any, to take. For this reason, it is important to have a clear workplace social media policy in place to help prevent the likelihood of an incident or at least limit its impact. But while courts and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seem to be employer friendly of late in approval of such policies, it is important to tread carefully, aiming to develop a policy that achieves the company’s legitimate business interests without compromising its employees’ right to privacy under statutory and common law and rights related to freedom of speech. Employers (and schools, alike) should continue to exercise care when addressing and/or responding to their employees’ (and students’) social media usage, particularly when it is “off premises” or “off the clock.”

 

Tags: employee privacy, First Amendment, off campus speech, school social media, social media, student privacy, student speech, Supreme Court, Tinker v. Des Moines, workplace social media
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Joseph J. Lazzarotti Joseph J. Lazzarotti

Joseph J. Lazzarotti is a principal in the Berkeley Heights, New Jersey, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He founded and currently co-leads the firm’s Privacy, Data and Cybersecurity practice group, edits the firm’s Privacy Blog, and is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP)…

Joseph J. Lazzarotti is a principal in the Berkeley Heights, New Jersey, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He founded and currently co-leads the firm’s Privacy, Data and Cybersecurity practice group, edits the firm’s Privacy Blog, and is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP) with the International Association of Privacy Professionals. Trained as an employee benefits lawyer, focused on compliance, Joe also is a member of the firm’s Employee Benefits practice group.

In short, his practice focuses on the matrix of laws governing the privacy, security, and management of data, as well as the impact and regulation of social media. He also counsels companies on compliance, fiduciary, taxation, and administrative matters with respect to employee benefit plans.

Privacy and cybersecurity experience – Joe counsels multinational, national and regional companies in all industries on the broad array of laws, regulations, best practices, and preventive safeguards. The following are examples of areas of focus in his practice:

  • Advising health care providers, business associates, and group health plan sponsors concerning HIPAA/HITECH compliance, including risk assessments, policies and procedures, incident response plan development, vendor assessment and management programs, and training.
  • Coached hundreds of companies through the investigation, remediation, notification, and overall response to data breaches of all kinds – PHI, PII, payment card, etc.
  • Helping organizations address questions about the application, implementation, and overall compliance with European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and, in particular, its implications in the U.S., together with preparing for the California Consumer Privacy Act.
  • Working with organizations to develop and implement video, audio, and data-driven monitoring and surveillance programs. For instance, in the transportation and related industries, Joe has worked with numerous clients on fleet management programs involving the use of telematics, dash-cams, event data recorders (EDR), and related technologies. He also has advised many clients in the use of biometrics including with regard to consent, data security, and retention issues under BIPA and other laws.
  • Assisting clients with growing state data security mandates to safeguard personal information, including steering clients through detailed risk assessments and converting those assessments into practical “best practice” risk management solutions, including written information security programs (WISPs). Related work includes compliance advice concerning FTC Act, Regulation S-P, GLBA, and New York Reg. 500.
  • Advising clients about best practices for electronic communications, including in social media, as well as when communicating under a “bring your own device” (BYOD) or “company owned personally enabled device” (COPE) environment.
  • Conducting various levels of privacy and data security training for executives and employees
  • Supports organizations through mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations with regard to the handling of employee and customer data, and the safeguarding of that data during the transaction.
  • Representing organizations in matters involving inquiries into privacy and data security compliance before federal and state agencies including the HHS Office of Civil Rights, Federal Trade Commission, and various state Attorneys General.

Benefits counseling experience – Joe’s work in the benefits counseling area covers many areas of employee benefits law. Below are some examples of that work:

  • As part of the Firm’s Health Care Reform Team, he advises employers and plan sponsors regarding the establishment, administration and operation of fully insured and self-funded health and welfare plans to comply with ERISA, IRC, ACA/PPACA, HIPAA, COBRA, ADA, GINA, and other related laws.
  • Guiding clients through the selection of plan service providers, along with negotiating service agreements with vendors to address plan compliance and operations, while leveraging data security experience to ensure plan data is safeguarded.
  • Counsels plan sponsors on day-to-day compliance and administrative issues affecting plans.
  • Assists in the design and drafting of benefit plan documents, including severance and fringe benefit plans.
  • Advises plan sponsors concerning employee benefit plan operation, administration and correcting errors in operation.

Joe speaks and writes regularly on current employee benefits and data privacy and cybersecurity topics and his work has been published in leading business and legal journals and media outlets, such as The Washington Post, Inside Counsel, Bloomberg, The National Law Journal, Financial Times, Business Insurance, HR Magazine and NPR, as well as the ABA Journal, The American Lawyer, Law360, Bender’s Labor and Employment Bulletin, the Australian Privacy Law Bulletin and the Privacy, and Data Security Law Journal.

Joe served as a judicial law clerk for the Honorable Laura Denvir Stith on the Missouri Court of Appeals.

Read more about Joseph J. Lazzarotti
Show more Show less
Photo of Jason C. Gavejian Jason C. Gavejian

Jason C. Gavejian is a principal in the Berkeley Heights, New Jersey, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. and co-leader of the firm’s Privacy, Data and Cybersecurity practice group. Jason is also a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP/US) with the International Association of Privacy…

Jason C. Gavejian is a principal in the Berkeley Heights, New Jersey, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. and co-leader of the firm’s Privacy, Data and Cybersecurity practice group. Jason is also a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP/US) with the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

As a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP/US), Jason focuses on the matrix of laws governing privacy, security, and management of data. Jason is co-editor of, and a regular contributor to, the firm’s Workplace Privacy, Data Management & Security Report blog.

Jason’s work in the area of privacy and data security includes counseling international, national, and regional companies on the vast array of privacy and security mandates, preventive measures, policies, procedures, and best practices. This includes, but is not limited to, the privacy and security requirements under state, federal, and international law (e.g., HIPAA/HITECH, GDPR, California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), FTC Act, ECPA, SCA, GLBA etc.). Jason helps companies in all industries to assess information risk and security as part of the development and implementation of comprehensive data security safeguards including written information security programs (WISP). Additionally, Jason assists companies in analyzing issues related to: electronic communications, social media, electronic signatures (ESIGN/UETA), monitoring and recording (GPS, video, audio, etc.), biometrics, and bring your own device (BYOD) and company owned personally enabled device (COPE) programs, including policies and procedures to address same. He regularly advises clients on compliance issues under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and has represented clients in suits, including class actions, brought in various jurisdictions throughout the country under the TCPA.

Jason represents companies with respect to inquiries from the HHS/OCR, state attorneys general, and other agencies alleging wrongful disclosure of personal/protected information. He negotiates vendor agreements and other data privacy and security agreements, including business associate agreements. His work in the area of privacy and data security includes counseling and coaching clients through the process of investigating and responding to breaches of the personally identifiable information (PII) or protected health information (PHI) they maintain about consumers, customers, employees, patients, and others, while also assisting clients in implementing policies, practices, and procedures to prevent future data incidents.

Jason represents management exclusively in all aspects of employment litigation, including restrictive covenants, class-actions, harassment, retaliation, discrimination, and wage and hour claims in both federal and state courts. He regularly appears before administrative agencies, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights, and the New Jersey Department of Labor. Jason’s practice also focuses on advising/counseling employers regarding daily workplace issues.

Jason’s litigation experience, coupled with his privacy practice, provides him with a unique view of many workplace issues and the impact privacy, data security, and social media may play in actual or threatened lawsuits.

Jason regularly provides training to both executives and employees and regularly speaks on current privacy, data security, monitoring, recording, BYOD/COPE, biometrics (BIPA), social media, TCPA, and information management issues. His views on these topics have been discussed in multiple publications, including the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, San Francisco Chronicle (SFGATE), National Law Review, Bloomberg BNA, Inc.com, @Law Magazine, Risk and Insurance Magazine, LXBN TV, Business Insurance Magazine, and HR.BLR.com.

Jason is the co-leader of Jackson Lewis’ Hispanic Attorney resource group, a group committed to increasing the firm’s visibility among Hispanic-American and other minority attorneys, as well as mentoring the firm’s attorneys to assist in their training and development. He also previously served on the National Leadership Committee of the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA) and regularly volunteers his time for pro bono matters.

Prior to joining Jackson Lewis, Jason served as a judicial law clerk for the Honorable Richard J. Donohue on the Superior Court of New Jersey, Bergen County.

Read more about Jason C. Gavejian
Show more Show less
Related Posts
HIPAA Regulated Entities: Website or App Tracking Technologies, Pixels Can Create Significant Compliance and Litigation Risks
January 2, 2023
Federal Trade Commission Considers Rulemaking Pertaining to Consumer Privacy & Data
August 23, 2022
CPPA Votes to Proceed with CPRA Rulemaking
June 9, 2022
Jackson Lewis JacksonLewis.com

Stay Connected

Subscribe to this blog via RSS Follow Us on Twitter Add us on Facebook View Our LinkedIn Profile

Topics

Archives

Editors

  • Jason C. Gavejian
  • Joseph J. Lazzarotti

Contributors

  • Christopher E. Hoyme
  • Damon W. Silver
  • Michael R. Bertoncini
  • Marlo Johnson Roebuck
  • Nathan W. Austin
  • Nicky Jatana
  • Jeffrey M. Schlossberg

Blog Authors Show/Hide

  • Joseph J. Lazzarotti
  • Jason C. Gavejian
  • Maya Atrakchi
  • Jackson Lewis P.C.
  • Mary T. Costigan
  • Damon W. Silver
  • Jeffrey M. Schlossberg
  • Michael R. Bertoncini
  • Robert Yang
  • Christopher E. Hoyme
  • Rachel E. Ehlers
  • Frank J. Fanshawe
  • Sean Paisan
  • Jody Kahn Mason
  • Delonie A. Plummer
  • Richard I. Greenberg
  • Jerel Pacis Agatep
  • Catherine R. Tucciarello
  • Cecilie E. Read
  • Ronald V. Sgambati
  • Nathan W. Austin
  • Joshua D. Allen
  • Michelle T. Hackim
  • Gregory C. Brown Jr.
  • Daniel J. Moses
  • Yvonne Arvanitis Fossati
  • Todd R. Dobry
  • Susan M. Corcoran
  • Paul A. Friedman
  • Marlo Johnson Roebuck
  • Joseph J. Lynett
  • Jennifer Shoaf Richardson
  • Francis P. Alvarez
  • Amy L. Peck
  • Zachary A. Ahonen
  • John A. Snyder
  • Stephanie L. Adler-Paindiris
  • Richard F. Vitarelli
  • Kathryn J. Russo
  • Melissa Pascualini
  • Laura A. Mitchell
  • Michael D. Ridenour
  • Kevin D. Holden
  • Jonathan J. Spitz
  • Jason Selvey
  • Valerie K. Jackson
  • Jackson Biesecker
  • Howard M. Bloom
  • Erik J. Winton
  • Eric J. Felsberg
  • Elizabeth S. Walsh
  • David R. Golder
  • Craig W. Wiley
  • Clifford R. Atlas
  • Christopher T. Patrick
  • Chad P. Richter
  • Ashley Solowan
  • Regan Harrison
  • Paige
  • Nicky Jatana
  • Melissa Ostrower
  • Mei Fung So
  • Lara Hamm
  • Kourtney Goebel
  • Kendall Melidosian
  • Gayla Kirkland
  • Kelly
  • Katy Admirand
  • Katharine C. Weber
  • Jessica Poot
  • Jenifer M. Bologna
  • Jonathan L. Crook
  • Haley Nystrom
  • foxtemplate
  • Brendan Ward
  • Ann Albertson

Recent Upates

  • Iowa to Be Sixth State to Pass a Consumer Privacy Statute
  • CPPA Starts Rulemaking on Cybersecurity, Risk Assessments, and Automated Decision-making
  • Algorithms, Predictive Models, and the Colorado Division of Insurance
  • Stolen Databases Obtained In Transaction Leads to $400K Settlement with PA and OH Attorneys General
  • California Privacy Protection Agency Passes Revised Regulations

Jackson Lewis

Subscribe to this blog via RSS Follow Us on Twitter Add us on Facebook View Our LinkedIn Profile
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer

About Jackson Lewis

Focused on labor and employment law since 1958, Jackson Lewis P.C.’s 950+ attorneys located in major cities nationwide consistently identify and respond to new ways workplace law intersects business. We help employers develop proactive strategies, strong policies and business-oriented solutions to cultivate high-functioning workforces that are engaged, stable and diverse, and share our clients’ goals to emphasize inclusivity and respect for the contribution of every employee.

Read More...
Copyright © 2023, Jackson Lewis P.C. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo