Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Education Privacy News Your Rights Online

Judge Issues Temporary Order Blocking Expulsion For Refusing To Wear RFID Tag 305

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the dang-terrorist-judges dept.
An anonymous reader writes with an update about the student refusing to wear an RFID badge in Texas. From the article: "A district court judge for Bexar County has granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) to ensure that Andrea Hernandez, a San Antonio high school student from John Jay High School's Science and Engineering Academy, can continue her studies pending an upcoming trial. The Northside Independent School District (NISD) in Texas recently informed the sophomore student that she would be suspended for refusing to wear a 'Smart' Student ID card embedded with a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tracking chip."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Judge Issues Temporary Order Blocking Expulsion For Refusing To Wear RFID Tag

Comments Filter:
  • by L1mewater (557442) on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:32PM (#42074941)
    Keep reading the article. The father claims that they would remove the RFID from her badge only if they ceased criticizing the program and publicly endorsed it or something. If she had just gone along with that offer, plenty of other folks would be complaining about her not standing up for her principles.
  • by Paran (28208) on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:33PM (#42074947) Homepage
    Except the conditions on removing the chip required endorsement and giving up the right to criticize the tracking program.
  • by tlhIngan (30335) <slashdot@ w o r f.net> on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:42PM (#42075063)

    She is not disrupting other children's educations nor being violent of otherwise harmful, so the public education system does not have grounds for expulsion.

    Well, technically by not being "in attendance" they do, because thanks to some stupid laws (NCLB, I think?) high school funding is based on attendance. If a student is absent more than X days, the school is denied funding for that student (and it's easier ot just expel them and wipe their hands clean than anything).

    Which leads to solutions like this, where they don't care if one student swipes 10 RFID cards entering a class - they just want the record to state that said student was "present" at that class for that money.

    And of course, if a parent wonders where their kid is, they can always point to the RFID record, oh-you-mean-someone-else-stole-their-ID-not-our-problem.

  • by PlusFiveTroll (754249) on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:46PM (#42075103) Homepage

    >tl:dr is the internet equivalent of sticking you fingers in your ears and going "lalala". We don't need to know.

    tl:dr is what you did with the original article, and you didn't put any further research in to it. They told her she could have one with no battery if she didn't talk bad about the program. From other news sources (from before the infowars one) they state students that didn't have the fully working RFID card were not allowed to participate in student voting and other functions. Also not stated is that this is a pilot program for 100 other surrounding schools. Someone wants to to shut up so they can get rich implementing this at all the schools in the area.

  • by bondsbw (888959) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:08PM (#42075261)

    Some parts of the society can decide that they cannot function unless they implement a certain mechanism

    The fact that our society has managed to function for ages without having already implemented such a mechanism disproves your argument entirely.

  • by hypergreatthing (254983) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:12PM (#42075303)

    It's also extremely easy for me to point out that you didn't read the article(s) and understand why she objects to wearing it. As a fellow amateur radio "expert" I'd like to point out that the badge's transmit capability was never in question. Let alone you forget that the reader is the part that's plugged into the outlet pumping out any discernible wattage which you didn't take into consideration. Even that withstanding, it's not about radio transmissions at all. It's about privacy, the invisible man in the sky, and first amendment rights, and an overreaching school board.

  • by SplashMyBandit (1543257) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:24PM (#42075397)

    I don't get this ultimate desire for privacy.

    It is not the government's business what you do - provided you are not committing terrorism etc. This is a fundamental principle. It has nothing to do with whether you have done anything it is simply that the government has *no business* looking into your private life without certain exceptions that citizens have acquiesced to for the common good (eg. certain government agencies may carry out investigations but this requires checks and balances to prevent it being misused [eg. judicial oversight]).

    It is sad that you don't get it. Unfortunately many many people just don't grok the concept that the government is by us and for us, we are not servants of it (yet). It simply has no justification to probe our private affairs - that is not what governments were created for.

    In this case the school has taken a leaf out of the government's book and is completely mistaken in it should be doing. Yes, reducing truancy is a good thing. However, *enforcing* invasive tracking is completely wrong. It shows how detached from reality the school governance is - they simply don't understand they down 'own' their students. Although this is by no means unusual, many in the teaching profession are using to ordering their wards around exactly as they see fit (I've seen it for myself).

    Unfortunately, there are too many people who don't get the desire for privacy and use the "don't worry if you have nothing to hide" and "you are too small for the government to worry about" fallacies. The truth is that the government is usurping powers that it has not been granted and we should not go along with it - citizens have not granted the government these powers. Notice how that works, the legitimate authority flows from the citizens to the government, not the other way around. By usurping these powers the government (or school, in this case) is overstepping its permitted authority (that is, committing what would be a crime if a citizen did it). This must be pointed out and resisted (as the student so courageously did, despite probable peer pressure from mistaken sheep).

    Can you at least get that? She has the right to defend her rights. The government and school have no business *forcing* her to provide her whereabouts with RFID. If she is absent from school then that can be noted and action taken - this does not mean they have carte blanche to force tracking on her or anyone else. It should be unacceptable to even suggest this, yet the sheeple even support the illegitimate demand against someone standing up for their right not to be tracked. Surely you can understand that, yes?

  • by Xeno man (1614779) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:50PM (#42075651)
    There are some rights you can sign away and some you can't. Happens all the time in settlements. You can sing a paper stating that in exchange for receiving payment you waive your right to sue but you can't sign away human rights. You can sign an agreement that failure to pay back a loan in 30 days results in your becoming a slave to the other party but it's completely unenforceable.
  • by ArcadeMan (2766669) on Friday November 23, 2012 @03:24PM (#42075913)

    You can chose to not have a cellphone. You can chose not to have a credit card.

    But this RFID card is mandatory, which is the problem.

  • by w4rbl3r (2780399) on Friday November 23, 2012 @03:45PM (#42076041)
    I'm a senior in the same Science and Engineering program that Andrea is a member of. Some points: 1. Microwaving the cards causes visible burn marks. 2. The school has also blocked student led petitions against the ID cards, circulated during passing and free periods, on the grounds that they "disrupt the learning environment". 3. Thus far, the only students who have gotten in trouble for not wearing the ID cards are the vocal ones, like Andrea, or those who get in trouble for something else. However, the administration is starting to enforce the ID rules more heavily. I sincerely hope Andrea succeeds, and that this doesn't set an alarming precedent for the removal of student rights. Please let me know if you have any questions about the IDs or the program.
  • by bill_mcgonigle (4333) * on Friday November 23, 2012 @04:24PM (#42076377) Homepage Journal

    One of the things John Jay (US Supreme Court Justice) is known for is telling jurors that they are responsible for judging the law (the rules as handed down).

    It may not be amiss, here, Gentlemen, to remind you of the good old rule, that on questions of fact, it is the province of the jury, on questions of law, it is the province of the court to decide. But it must be observed that by the same law, which recognizes this reasonable distribution of jurisdiction, you have nevertheless a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy.

    I suspect he'd be proud of the student for deciding that this particular school rule is unjust and standing up for herself.

  • by w4rbl3r (2780399) on Friday November 23, 2012 @05:30PM (#42076811)
    SEA is a magnet school. It functions as a public school in many ways (no tuition, sports/extracurriculars are shared with Jay), but has its own admissions system separate from John Jay.
  • by theArtificial (613980) on Friday November 23, 2012 @05:44PM (#42076931)
    Hey funny guy, the article mentions they object on religious beliefs [infowars.com]. So only criminals or animals make use of RFID? Walmart [wsj.com] clothes must be criminals. I certainly hope you appreciate the irony if you use a mobile phone, since that actually broadcasts your location instead of simply responding.

To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.

Working...