There are a few problems with your post. From the top.... your emails are not private for several reasons, and I will explain.... Second, your interpretation of the First Amendment is odd and incorrect. Your thoughts on the 3d Amendment is incorrect as well as the 5th.
Shall we begin.
Emails are not private, in fact emails are the least private mode of correspondence..... just about as private as post cards. Phone calls, correspondence in sealed envelopes sent through the US Mail are considered private and law enforcement need warrants to obtain them.... not true with emails..... Your home computer is considered private property, but not the electronic information contained on that computer, such as photos downloaded from the net and emails that have been sent or received. Computers you use at work are considered the property of the business.... and that includes all data on that computer, emails, spreadsheets, passwords, word documents.... everything belongs to the company and if you work for the government.... it belongs to them. This extends to tablets and blackberries... if furnished by the company or government... regardless of the physical location of that device.
Now you are saying.... why....right? There is not just one copy of your emails, they are stored in multiple locations: on the sender's computer, your Internet Service Provider's (ISP) server, and on the receiver's computer. Deleting an email from your inbox doesn't mean there aren't multiple other copies still out there. Emails are also vastly easier for employers and law enforcement to access than phone records. Finally, due to their digital nature, they can be stored for very long periods of time.
Email privacy is derived from the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and is governed by the "reasonable expectation of privacy" standard. Unfortunately, given the open nature of email mentioned above (passing through several computers and stored at multiple locations), the expectation of privacy is less for email, especially email at work, than for other forms of communication.
Emails are also governed by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) and the Patriot Act. Although the ECPA originally set up protections (such as a warrant requirement) to protect email, those protections have been weakened in many instances by the Patriot Act. Even where the protections remain under the ECPA, emails lose their status as a protected communication in 180 days, which means a warrant is no longer necessary and your emails can be accessed by a simple subpoena.
Now.... let us talk about the Bill of Rights.
The First Amendment does not protect your religious privacy...... it forbids Congress from establishing a state religion and guarantees your right to or not to worship G*d. This amendment protects your right of freedom of speech..... however, the Supreme Court has defined this right and has set limitations on this right. It provided freedom of press, meaning that you or the media can not be coerced into printing or not printing or on open airways to present the news as they see it... but does not relieve them from being sued for the contents of their offerings. You have a right to peaceably assemble, which does not protect you if you break local or state laws for impeding the use of highways, sidewalks and it does not entitle looting or violence of any form. And finally, this amendment guarantees your right to question the government and express your complaints to the government.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "
The 3d Amendment...has nothing to do with privacy, but simply says that the government or military can not take over your home to house or board soldiers either in peacetime or war.... unless you give permission or your local government and laws have the prevision. And this would include the government declare Martial Law.
"No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."
The 4th Amendment extends the right reasonable expectation of privacy.... now if your computer has private letters that has not been stored on the Cloud or emailed.... then yes, a court order would be required to obtain them..... however the operative word is "reasonable" .....
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The 5th Amendment... again does not give you privacy. This one is jammed packed.... most often it is used to protect oneself from having to testify against themselves. And protects your ownership of private property from being taken and used by the public. Now it also says that if you are indicted by Grand Jury by the court for presentment, you must appear and present testimony.... if the testimony will be against yourself, you can claim protection....but, against others you are expected to show up and testify with the truth as you know it to be.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
To conclude, the hacker did break the law by using code or devices to break into emails. That law is 18 U.S.C. § 1029. This law concentrate on the creation, distribution and use of codes and devices that give hackers unauthorized access to computer systems. The language of the law only specifies using or creating such a device with the intent to defraud, so an accused hacker could argue he just used the devices to learn how security systems worked. And this law does not protect the use of data obtained by hacking. In other words, the code and means of hacking is illegal, but the distribution of the data is not covered unless it is intended for blackmail or committing fraud. Even if the identity of the hacker is discovered, it is highly unlikely they will ever be prosecuted.
This law is too long to quote, so here is the link....
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1029MsCentralia wrote:
The media is violating the Constitution by publishing Clinton's--or anyone else's--illegally hacked .
"For example, the first amendment allows the privacy of beliefs, the third amendment protects privacy of the home against any demands to be used to house soldiers, the fourth amendment protects the privacy of a person and possessions from unreasonable searches, and the 5th Amendment gives privacy of personal information through preventing self-incrimination.
"Furthermore, the 9th Amendment says that the enumeration of certain rights as found in the Bill of Rights cannot deny other rights of the people. While this is a vague statement, court precedent has said that the 9th amendment is a way to justify looking at the Bill of Rights as a way to protect the right to privacy in a specific way not given in the first 8 amendments."
http://constitution.laws.com/right-to-privacyHacking and then publishing the results by the media violates the 4th Amendment as an unreasonable search and seizure, as well as the 5th Amendment that gives privacy of personal information through preventing of self-incrimination.
It seems rather odd and very troubling to me that no one, Left or Right, even questioned the right of the press to violate privacy in this way. Have we become so scared or numb or cynical that such an outrageous invasion of privacy goes unnoticed? The Patriot Act and its indiscriminate citizen spying for our "protection" is a stake in the heart of this Republic. IT MUST GO! The evidence of how it has changed our basic perception of freedom, fundamental to maintaining this country's ideals of liberty, is clear in not a single voice objecting to the publication by the media of Hillary's, or any person's, private communications.
The media is violating the Constitution by publish... (
show quote)