Our Opinion: Amendment won't be final word on digital privacy issue

A proposed constitutional amendment regarding digital privacy rights is largely benign.

Persuasive arguments to support or reject this proposal elude us. Reflecting the existential concept that not choosing is a choice, we offer no compelling opinion as our opinion on this ballot issue.

The ballot title for Amendment 9, to be decided Tuesday, reads: "Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended so that people shall be secure in their electronic communications and data from unreasonable searches and seizures as they are now likewise secure in their persons, homes, papers and effects?"

The question, at first blush, sounds attractive. Why not extend privacy rights - outlined in the U.S. Constitution's 4th Amendment - to the expanding digital realm.

Supporters of the amendment include proverbial "strange bedfellows" representing both conservative and liberal ideologies.

Opponents do not castigate the amendment as potentially harmful, only that it is an unnecessary, "feel-good" state policy likely to be superseded by federal law.

Their claims were bolstered recently when a digital privacy issue was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld protections of cellphone data from police searches.

In this global, "brave new world" of digital communications, a state law - even an amendment to the state constitution - is unlikely to be the final word on what is private, public, personal, shared and tapped.

The Federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act was passed nearly three decades ago, but continues to play a woeful game of catch-up with more rapidly paced technology.

Questions to contemplate are how does a Missouri amendment provide protection from: Digital snooping by a federal agency, the National Security Agency, or surreptitious Facebook posts to poll users' moods?

And, how does the proposed amendment address the conundrum reported in a recent news story about parents who attempted to access their deceased child's social media sites?

The amendment may provide a sense of security, but likely will do little to secure or solve digital privacy issues.

We lean toward toward rejecting Amendment 9, not because we find it troublesome, but because we're weary of amending the Constitution with superfluous provisions.