I agree that private individuals and corporations have a right to restrict what they want. But they have to play by the rules that we all agreed upon when we joined the site.

When you sign up, you have to agree to an acceptable use policy which bans "obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit" images.

So how exactly is a woman breast feeding obscene? It is not, of course, and I dare say that the Facebook owners ever intended for these photos to be banned.

But the way that Facebook censors interpret the rule is that is if there is any nipple showing, it gets deleted.

Clearly, management needs to rewrite the censors rule book to allow an exception for breast-feeding.

This has almost nothing to do with the first amendment, and more to do with a woman's "right to privacy" -- ie. the right to do what she wants with her body without prudes or religious nuts making it illegal.

Can the police put a beeper/tracker in a container which is sold to a suspect? Yes, according to United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983) [ http://supreme.justia.com/us/460/276/index.html ] and United States v Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (1984) [ http://supreme.justia.com/us/468/705/index.html ].

Basically, a person traveling in an automobile on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements.