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This discussion has been archived.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:
  • The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused. I'd have some sympathy if the college hadn't offered this option, but as it stands it's simply refusal to wear an ID badge and has nothing to do with RFID tracking...good luck to her when it comes to finding a job with any company that uses ID badges of any description.
    • 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 Penguinisto (415985) on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:34PM (#42074971) Journal

      You missed the part where the school also required that the parents and student must vocally support the RFID program, even with a crippled badge.

      You also missed the part where wearing said badge -crippled or not- implies acceptance of the program to the other students, forcing compliance.

    • by wisnoskij (1206448) on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:37PM (#42075007) Homepage

      Well I think at this point it is the principal of the matter.
      I imagine she would of been perfectly fine wearing the normal ID badge, but after encountering so much opposition she has dug in her heels.

      And she is right to. She is guaranteed a high-school public education and I doubt that it is legal to force things like this onto children and then expel them when they refuse. 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.

      • by tlhIngan (30335) <slashdotNO@SPAMworf.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 TubeSteak (669689) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:03PM (#42075215) Journal

          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).

          They schools also play games where students get transferred to another school, so that they don't count on the rolls and the clock is reset for the second school.

          Ultimately, education starts at home.

        • by Mitreya (579078)

          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.

          The solution is clear then
          Schools cannot be allowed to claim RFID swipes as "attendance" since they in no way serve as a guarantee of attendance. This would solve everyone's problems...

      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:51PM (#42075137)

        Well I think at this point it is the principal of the matter.
        I imagine she would of been perfectly fine wearing the normal ID badge, but after encountering so much opposition she has dug in her heels.

        And she is right to. She is guaranteed a high-school public education and I doubt that it is legal to force things like this onto children and then expel them when they refuse. 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.

        I think you meant the principle of the matter. Here's the principal of the matter: https://nisd.schoolnet.com/outreach/jjhs/admin/harris/

        This is the guy responsible for trying to expel her because she stood up for her rights.

    • 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 interkin3tic (1469267) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:03PM (#42075221)
      A lot of people don't stand up for their rights just for themselves, they stand up for the rights of all. "We'll give you an exception because you made some noise, but we're still going to press ahead with this utterly pointless scheme to chip every student" is not really a victory.

      And, as others have pointed out, it would require them to endorse it.
    • by mysidia (191772) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:33PM (#42075503)

      The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused. I'd have some sympathy if the college hadn't offered this option

      And you'd have some sympathy for Rosa parks, if the driver hadn't offered her the option of standing, instead of leaving the bus?

      It might be work, if the college promised to have no battery, chip, or RFID in the cards of all students.

      Otherwise, it's just a continuation of the status quo.

      Attempting to work out an exception for the person with the courage to refuse and mount a legal challenge with great personal cost, without changing the rules for everyone, doesn't rectify the social injustice; it just results in a situation that is even more unfair,....

      Oh, and also.... if you have one or two people with no RFID chip, they will be easy to track.

      I'm surprised they don't work out a deal with that company that lets business monitor foot traffic in their stores by tracking individual cell phones.

    • by mpe (36238)
      The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused.

      If the device contains a battery then it will have a much longer effective range compared with a passive RFID. At least until the battery fails. Wonder if anyone has considered what to do when that starts happening. There's also the issue of what to do when bullies and criminals find out what the effective range of these devices is.
    • by anagama (611277)

      1. This is a high school, not JPL. The secrets and technology contained in HS are barely worth the time of day and do not require extreme measures of protection.
      2. Children are required to attend HS. Employment is totally voluntary.

      Get 'em young, get 'em for life. The darker side of this is getting young people to accept constant tracking by agents of the government. Yes, we all have cell phones, but this is much more overt, and much more dangerous because like employment, having a cell phone is volun

  • Number (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:31PM (#42074929)
    Why not just make the ID a number tatooed onto the forearm, papers please, Oh Godwined
  • by cob666 (656740)
    I personally don't see any problem with students having to wear RFID badges while they are at school.
    • by Kingofearth (845396) * on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:37PM (#42075009)
      Yes, let's condition our children to be treated like cattle. I'm sure that will do wonders for our free society!
      • by mysidia (191772)

        Yes, let's condition our children to be treated like cattle. I'm sure that will do wonders for our free society!

        Sure... I wonder why they aren't implanting the RFID tags though?

        RFID badges are easily traded/held by friends, zapped with a microwave, or blocked with RF blocking.

        • by lgw (121541) on Friday November 23, 2012 @04:05PM (#42076223) Journal

          The school wants the kids to fake attendance. That th secret here. US schools are paid by attendance. Teachers taking roll call is too hard to fake without overt fraud. An electronic system allows (and greatly motivates) the students to devise systems to fake attendance, which the school can then act surprised about when the system is discovered. Much better money that way.

    • by Paran (28208) on Friday November 23, 2012 @01:39PM (#42075027) Homepage
      Then allow them to chip your children and stay away from mine.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by guitarMan666 (1388859)
      Because there isn't one. Tracking student attendance is commonplace and has been for many years. Tracking student location is also commonplace. This device simply automates it. Now if she can make a case based on her religion then good on her but the right to privacy is usually suspended while on campus. In my district, this took the form of a signed agreement form by parent and student agreeing that, while on school property and/or time, the Code of Conduct superseded legal rights. You can sign away legal
      • by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:07PM (#42075255) Homepage Journal

        , the Code of Conduct superseded legal rights. You can sign away legal rights in a contract.

        Utter bogus bullshit. You BELIEVED that nonsense? It's been ruled, again and again, that you cannot sign away any of your rights with a contract. No TOS, no code of conduct, no contract, no employer's regulations, NOTHING supersedes your rights as established by law. Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, the right to be secure in your person and your home, all of that is LAW, and nothing supersedes it.

        Good God, how can ANYONE roll over and play dead, just because some arrogant bastard tells them to? This is America, not some warlord's regime in the outback of Africa.

        • No TOS, no code of conduct, no contract, no employer's regulations, NOTHING supersedes your rights as established by law.

          Let's use an NDA, or a Security Clearance as an example. NDAs are contracts [wikipedia.org]. These contracts restrict you from talking about something you otherwise would be able to. You could still do it, but you'll be facing penalties for doing so. These are not 'rolling over and playing dead' these are agreements entered into willingly. If you break the agreement it means your word is worthless, how about not agreeing to something you otherwise have no intention of doing.

      • by spire3661 (1038968) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:35PM (#42075515) Journal
        Work is not school. They are not equivalent and you would do very well to remember that. What adults CHOOSE to do when they enter the workplace is VASTLY different from forcing it on a child. I dont know about you, but i have always had the ability to walk away from a job i dont like, kids dont have that option. Are you starting to see the fundamental difference?
    • by jitterman (987991)
      Slippery slope starts now...
    • by MitchDev (2526834)
      And people like you are a large part of what's wrong wth America. The founding fathers would start a new American revolution against the current government if they were alive and saw the shit government pulls these days...
      • And people like you are a large part of what's wrong wth America. The founding fathers would start a new American revolution against the current government if they were alive and saw the shit government pulls these days...

        Being not an American, articles like this remind me why I want to laugh hysterically when someone claims the USA are "the freest country in the world".

        • by lgw (121541)

          Few from the USA would claim this. We have pretty darn good freedom of speech protection, not having fallen for the whole "hate speech" scam yet (hey, let's outlaw speech the government hates, it's for the best!). That's about it though. The Bill of Rights created a very free nation once, but most of that has been lost. Well, police still need a warrant from a judge for most things, so we've got that going for us.

    • by jythie (914043)
      In this case, religious objection.
    • by readin (838620)

      I personally don't see any problem with students having to wear RFID badges while they are at school.

      Put a reader on the entrance to the bathrooms so you can track how often and for how long every student is using the bathrooms. As a bonus you can use a computer to determine which students are frequently entering the restroom together.

      Add more readers in the hallway so you can track Ms. Hernandez to find out who she hangs out with, who her boyfriend most likely is, when she goes to the restroom, how long she stays there, how often she's alone...

      Put together a database for all the students and I'm su

    • by Arker (91948)
      I see a big problem with the power and tax money of the state being used to force children into a monopolistic school system which proceeds to treat them as, and condition them to accept being treated as, cattle. I really do. A school in a free society should be geared towards teaching children the exact opposite of what this is teaching them. If our schools were doing their jobs, most or all of the students would be refusing to go along with this, instead of just one.
  • Had she mentioned the invasion of privacy in the first step and the "the number of the beast" maybe they would have listened and people would have given her more credit.

    The problem with religion is that people who believe in certain things will always argue that it's their right to belive in something and that the value fo truth of the said religion it's a matter of personal belief, hence it cannot be proved correct or otherwise from outisde nor do they want to listen to those arguments (granted, it's th
    • by cripkd (709136)
      Replying my own post here...
      TFA only presents the father's opinion which, I'm sorry to say so, seems to be very subjective. I seriously doubt that the school literally asked the girl to proudly wear the tag around her neck. Something in the way he "sais" it makes me think he's a bit ... well, subjective.
      Why isn't TFA presenting the schools reasons for implementing this systems, what are it's goals, what was the process by which this solution was chosen, how were the students informed about this etc.
      Oh
    • 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 cripkd (709136)
        Yes, our "society" has "functioned" for ages without basic commodities too.
        So possibility of living without a certain comfort or rule doesn't make that rule wrong or that comfort a whim.
        Again, did anyone care to look into this school's reasons and rules to implement this program?
        I'm not from the US so I don;t know, is this a public or a private school? If it's a public school, were they notified in advance of what will the campus life involve?
        Are they free to join another school?
        • by bondsbw (888959)

          Are they free to join another school?

          Dear God, what has our nation come to?

        • by readin (838620)

          Yes, our "society" has "functioned" for ages without basic commodities too. So possibility of living without a certain comfort or rule doesn't make that rule wrong or that comfort a whim.

          One of the prices we pay for living in a society that values freedom of religion, and freedom in general, is accepting a certain amount of non-conformity and sometimes making exemptions for people. For example, during WWII many people who belonged to certain religious organizations were not required to carry a weapon and kill others because they had well-known long-standing religious beliefs. In some cases they were asked to do other things such as treating wounded, but they were not required to do the k

  • by NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:04PM (#42075229)
    Trying to keep tabs on us at all times, even considering it was over 20 years ago, I've got to side with the kid this time.(Especially given how much data they could get now with this tech. They'll probably abuse it.)
    • by mysidia (191772)

      They'll probably abuse it.)

      Data on when the student enters and exits the classroom?

      In what manner is it even possible to abuse that; which doesn't exist with normal manual attendance taking?

      • by Mitreya (579078)

        They'll probably abuse it.)

        Data on when the student enters and exits the classroom?

        In what manner is it even possible to abuse that; which doesn't exist with normal manual attendance taking?

        No, not that
        Data on where/how the student spends her lunch break.
        Data on when the student goes to the bathroom.
        Not to mention concerns regarding fake card swipes (oh, the student is missing? But she was regularly attending every class with her friend for the last two days. With the exact same entry/exit times, too.).

  • Let's just send the little delinquents straight to prison.

  • by mark-t (151149) <markt@@@lynx...bc...ca> on Friday November 23, 2012 @02:29PM (#42075457) Journal

    If the student's religion requires that they not wear such articles, then I think it's a pretty clear case that the student should not be going to that school.

    Schools, even public ones, are permitted to have dress codes, and wearing a specially issued id tag on your clothes while you are on school property is really not that big a deal. There's shouldn't be concern about being tracked off of school property because because one's location through RFID can only be tracked if they are in close proximity of an RFID reader that understands what the tag is, and who it belongs to. The RFID readers which are connected to the database of RFID tags owned by the school aren't going to be anywhere but on school property, so that's the only place where one is ever going to be tracked.

    There should be no more concern that this could be used to invade somebody's privacy than an RFID card issued to an employee to get into a company building during non-office hours could reasonably represent a privacy invasion for that employee.

    • Schools, even public ones, are permitted to have dress codes, and wearing a specially issued id tag on your clothes while you are on school property is really not that big a deal.

      It isn't? How did my generation survive in high school without ID badges or cards?

    • Schools, even public ones, are permitted to have dress codes,

      And where I was brought up, not one parent and not one kid would put up with that bullshit.

      • by mark-t (151149)
        Actually, they did. You just were probably unaware of it because most public school dress codes do not differ significantly from public decency standards.
    • It's only a pilot program. As all things of the kind, their purpose is not only to test the process, but to acclimatize people to the new reality. In a little while new reality becomes "it's always been that way", and then they can move for wider application. And what better way to do so than to begin with school students. Why, you could then combine RFID databases between schools "for improved information sharing", then perhaps offer local malls, movie theaters etc. data for them to better gauge their audi

  • RFIDs don't react well to the microwave oven. I'm just sayin'.

  • Outside Agencies (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Friday November 23, 2012 @03:34PM (#42075969)

    Don't forget that if each kid is required to carry their RFID card whenever they are in school they will also carry that card the vast majority of the time. Now I own a store and want to know when a certain student enters my store what prevents me from installing RFID readers in my store and reading the cards and developing a database from there.

    For example: when ever card number NNNNN is in the store I have more shoplifting so I ban the student carrying that card from my store with no proof they stole anything.

    We could go on from there.

  • 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 osssmkatz (734824)
      Is this a public institution? They are making the claim that it disrupts the learning environment because that is the standard required under Tinker vs. Des Moine School District, but they are wrong. "A student's rights do not end at the schoolhouse gates". --Sam
    • by lgw (121541)

      Here's hoping someone with mod points sees this. Reminds me of the early slashdot, when people with first-hand information on the topic would take part in discussions.

      Of course, the schoo won't make a point of enforcing it the first year beyond those who are vocal about it - everyone needs to accept that "the badges are required, the badges have always been required, that's just the way it is" before they crack down.

  • 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.

  • I thought the attorney made a good point ...

    "Regimes in the past have always started with the schools, where they develop a compliant citizenry," Whitehead continued. "These 'Student Locator' programs are ultimately aimed at getting students used to living in a total surveillance state where there will be no privacy, and wherever you go and whatever you text or email will be watched by the government."

    Poor girl. She just wants to live in freedom. I wonder where she got that idea?

The IQ of the group is the lowest IQ of a member of the group divided by the number of people in the group.

Working...