Holy shit dude he’s in a public space. She didn’t hack his phone to get to his texts. He was openly writing them. There is no law saying you can’t read what’s on someone else’s phone when it’s in plain view of you. And when that shit is about you specifically, shit man all bets are off. She didn’t do anything wrong. He was being the asshole. If he wanted to he could’ve sent the text when he landed, but he didn’t. There’s no expectation of privacy in these situations.

It doesn’t matter that you’re on a private device. It literally law that there is no expectation of privacy even if you’re using your own private device IN A PUBLIC SPACE. How is this lost on everyone?

Except that her recording that is 100% covered by the first amendment. He was conducting a conversation in plain view of everyone in a public space. He made his conversation public by holding it in a public space in the first place. She did not invasively record. She was sitting in her seat, using her phone in her space. She did not reach over. She did not take his phone. He made his phone visible to her in clear view of her eyes and she recorded what was in front of her.

Point stands : if you want to say stupid shit save it for a private area, period.

Sure. Go ahead and prove me wrong. Cite your own case law. Fucks sake. Not to mention they’re in federal airspace so no local jurisdiction actually applies here.

I didn’t intentionally skip it. It’s not relevant. He has a perfectly reasonable right to privacy in his own home. Should’ve just sent his stupid texts from home. Period. He wrote his private texts in a public space.

Here’s a test for you: go watch porn on your phone in a public space and see the reaction you get. Record it and post it and let’s see how it holds up.

Except she wasn’t in a local jurisdiction. She was in federal airspace. Hence jurisdiction wouldn’t fall on any locality, but within the FAA.

Edit: you know what, go watch porn in a public space and bitch at people who tell you to turn it off. Record your interaction and post it here and let’s test your theory.

https://www.stimmel-law.com/en/articles/legal-right-privacy#:~:text=Invasion of privacy is a,her name for personal gain.

Liability for a claim of invasion of privacy by intrusion must be based upon an intentional interference with the plaintiff’s interest in solitude or seclusion, either as to his/her person or as to his/her private affairs or concerns. Uranga v. Federated Publs., Inc., 138 Idaho 550 (Idaho 2003).

She didn’t interfere with any of his assumption of privacy, which again is null and void in a public place which is where they both were. He decided to make his texts visible not just to her but presumably to the person in the seat on the other side of him. And potentially to the person behind them. The texts were in full view of the public, plain and simple.

Yes what’s contained on them when they’re locked. When you’re doing shit in public expect people to be able to see it. Do you watch porn in public places and expect people not to look at your phone? Same god damn principle. If you’re doing something weird on your phone in fucking public expect to be called on it. There’s literally no law that prevents anyone from seeing what’s on your phone in a public space. How fucking dense are you about this

Lol there’s no expectation of privacy in any of that. She had every right to call his racist ass out.